The Fresh Prince of Washington Heights

Stephany Batista

            In Cutler’s article, she discusses a certain young man, named Mike, who inhabits the hip-hop culture.  Although Mike grew up in an extremely wealthy neighborhood, he attempts to make himself part of the gang life that some of his other friends are part of.  But because of Mike’s upbringing, his use of African American Vernacular English is seen as inauthentic.  But later in the article Cutler mentions a young girl, who although she is also white like Mike, also speaks in African American Vernacular English. However, it is perceived that Carla’s use is more acceptable because she lives in a predominantly African American community, where this vernacular is very common, whereas it is not so common in Mike’s affluent neighborhood. While Cutler makes many good points, I tend to think that a person’s background and neighborhood influences their language more than race.

           

           In this clip from the popular show The Fresh Prince of Bel Air, Carlton Banks is attempting to prove to his cousin Will Smith that he can survive a period of time in Compton. Carlton, for those of you that have not watched it (and I do not know why you would not have watched it!), grew up in an extremely wealthy family. They live in a large mansion in the Bel Air area of California. Will, on the other hand (as the theme song says), was born and raised in West Philadelphia. But because of fights in the neighborhood, Will’s mother sends him to live with his aunt and uncle in Bel Air. Will and Carlton are complete polar opposites. Carlton attends an expensive prep school and receives good grades, while Will gets into trouble on his first day.

            

            In this particular clip, Will bets Carlton that he cannot survive a day in Compton, a very violent neighborhood in California. If Carlton does win the bet, then Will must never again make fun of Carlton. In the beginning of the clip, Will is seen telling his best friend Jazz that he had to convince Carlton not to yell out “Dynomite!” The phrase comes from the television show Good Times that aired during the late 1970s. The character JJ Evans, who often shouted the word out, popularized the catchphrase. The family on Good Times lived in the projects, although they would not be thought to inhabit the hip-hop culture that Will Smith was raised in. However, it seems that this is the only exposure Carlton has had to life in the projects. So although Carlton Banks is African American, as well as his whole family, he does not speak in African American Vernacular English, but could instead be categorized as a nerd, who speaks in hyper standard English.  But because of the bet Carlton has with Will, the audience sees him start to talk in African American Vernacular English, using the phrase “Yo wassup?” But just a minute later, at 1:47, we see the nerdy Carlton revert back to his old self and correct one of the other men on how to pronounce Deutsche Mark.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-YGzZIgy-0 
(This is a before video of when Carlton first arrives is Compton.)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USb-XNYqjZk
(This is an after video of when Carlton has had time to assimilate.)

         While Carlton Banks is one example of appropriation, we must remember that he is a character on a show. However, there are many other examples of real-life people who speak in a manner that we would not expect them to. One such example is a popular Youtuber, who goes by the name FunnyChloeMichelle. This young girl, Chloe, became very popular on the Internet after one of videos went viral. The particular video was one in which Chloe was taking on the role and speech pattern of a girl living in the neighborhood Washington Heights. As someone who has been to Washington Heights many times and even has friends and family who speak like this, I found her accent very authentic sounding. When looking at Chloe, it is immediately apparent that she is white and that this is her not her normal manner of speaking.

            

         In this particular video, which happens to be my favorite, Chloe takes on the speech pattern of three different characters, each with his or her own specific accent and vernacular. The first character that Chloe inhabits is one of a foreign exchange student from Britain who happens to be staying with Chloe’s infamous character Krismeyris, the young girl from Washington Heights. Chloe also goes on to adopt the masculine voice of Miguel, who is dating Krismeyris. Chloe is able to expertly code switch between all three “languages.” Code switching is defined as the simultaneous use of more than one language while in a conversation. Chloe is able to do this effectively without ever reverting back to her native speech. 

           I find these two particular examples particularly interesting because of the similarities between them. Carlton Banks is an African American, who is thought to be outside of the norm in that he often speaks in hyperstandard English. Chloe is a white female, who is able to take on different speech patterns. Both of these examples have had their language affected by their neighborhood and the people that surround them. Carlton, as I previously stated, grew up in a wealthy neighborhood that was predominantly white. Carlton, therefore, never had any people around him who spoke in African American Vernacular English until Will came to live with the family.  Chloe, on the other hand, has stated previously that she lives in a neighborhood that is predominantly Latino. Both are speaking in patterns that would be thought to not be the norm for someone of their race. Their speech patterns seem to take after whichever race is predominant in their own particular neighborhood. This could possibly be seen as something that is deliberate and an attempt to assimilate into the culture of the community.  This could simply be, though, that appropriation is something that subconsciously happens, with no deliberate thought put into adopting a different manner of speaking. How ever appropriation occurs, it is clear that it could involve more than one language and that it could happen regardless of a person’s race or ethnicity.

I’m Fresh Off the Boat!

by: Holley Davis

Metapragmatics; now that is a scary word. Thankfully we have dictionary.com to break it down for us. “Metapragmatics: An awareness by a speaker of the intentions and effects of one's speech.” (www.dictionary.com) Through this definition we are introduced to the linguistic theory that we are conscious of what we say and how our speech shapes our identity in relation to others – we are navigating and reinforcing our societal roles in our speech all the time. Looking at this from the other side, observers of another’s speech assume that the speaker is conscious of the role they are projecting through their speech - the speaker is fulfilling a role in the listener’s mind; one that has most likely already been inhabited by some stereotypical model of that person. Thus the stereotype we have of that person and the messages of personhood that one conveys through their speech serve to reinforce each other; I have an idea about who you are, and I assume that you are aware of the projection of self that you are sending out to me in your speech which feeds onto my stereotype about you!

To help us understand this idea of metapragmatics and examine it in a more tangible way, we will use one of this weeks readings, Speaking like a Model Minority: “FOB” Styles, Gender, and Racial Meanings among Desi teens in Silicon Valley by Shalini Shankar, to use as a foundational example of metapragmatics in action to examine how FOB teens in mark their distance (and have their distanced marked) from their more popular and mainstream peers.

Shankar defines FOBs as “…middle-class Sikh Punjabis that popular teens marginalize and distance themselves from based on their ways of dressing, speaking and comportment in school.” (Shankar, 270) The connotatively derogative term FOB – “fresh off the boat” is meant to mark an immigrant/alien (we can expand Shankar’s notation of Sikh Punjabis to all Asians) who has recently come to America and retains much of the culture and style of their homeland as someone who has not assimilated into the culture, style, and values of America. Their assumed unwillingness to participate in American culture marks them as outsiders – they are “othered” in relation with other Asians who have assimilated into American culture. Below is a depiction of a FOB:

Shankar explains the perceived differences between FOBs and their more culturally forward counterparts, Desi teens, saying “ FOB attributes include not adequately following fashion trends, having oily hair, speaking Punjabi at school, and speaking Desi accented English…Notably, these codes do not involve distancing oneself form everything South Asian…FOB styles act as claps between marginalized Desi teens and popular Desi teens as well as those school faculty who indicate that marginalized youth embody nonnormative attributes.” (Shankar, 270)

From Shankar’s quote we see the underlying tension between FOBs and their more assimilated counterparts. Asians are the model minority in America, due to their “work” of cultural assimilation and aspirations socio-economic mobility they are on the verge of being integrated into the dominant power in America, that is to say, white America. FOBs are the polar opposite of these aspiring assimilationists and thus endanger the entrance and acceptance of Asian into the category of White. FOBs retain their cultural ties publically which sends up red flags that may endanger this entrance into whiteness.

However, there is a tension – for in our politically correct world, difference is purportedly celebrated which gives license to FOBs to act and speak however they wish. FOBs should be able to celebrate their connection to their homeland and their multicultural identity, whether seriously in public expressions and cultural events  or in jest like this parody of Snoop Dogg’s Drop it Like It’s Hot, Drop it like a FOB (South Asian)

Yet the underlying power structure in America says otherwise – while you may celebrate your diverse cultures it should be within a designated space and time that is considered appropriate and safe, such as cultural performances. Performing and exhibiting your multiple layers of identity outside of this space are a threat to our monoglot culture and it’s ideas. Thus when the FOB teens in Shankar’s article openly speak Punjabi in school (a designated English only area) they are infringing on and endangering the power structure engrained in American society!

Looking at this view through a metapragmatic lens, we see the precarious position more assimilated Asians are in. America is an incredibly racialized country, viewing individual persons as part of and representative of a larger racial whole. Thus, even through a Desi teen may see themselves as being totally different from a FOB, chances are, a more ignorant American will just see them as Indian or Asian. When FOBs display their otherness through speech, especially in a space that has not been sanctioned as “safe” they are supposedly knowingly communicating and reproducing roles of difference between themselves and others who are not like them. Since one is representative of the whole, this can be expanded to the entire group – even those who want to assimilate into American culture are then thought to be harboring ties back to their homeland and therefore do not see themselves as truly “American,” which is a big no-no, especially for the group that is on the verge of becoming “white” and gaining the power and freedom that comes with joining the dominant group.

The racially homogenizing lens that people are viewed from is obviously a great disservice, as is the long standing structure of white dominance in American culture – this prohibits so much growth within our country. Using stereotypes of race and language are not helpful when trying to understand people and cultures – for there are wide variances in each culture, each race, and each language that are most definitely not representative of the whole.

As a joking example of the variances that there are within race and language, I leave you with one last video provided by the Brown Chinese Student Association: What Kind of Asian are You? 

The Ultimate Minority Group: The Stylistic and Linguistic Practices of Desi Teens

Natalie
Born Confused by Tanuja Desai Hidier chronicles the struggles of an Indian-American teenager, Dimple Lala, as she tries to shed her Desi image in favor of an Americanized identity. Throughout the book, Dimple is spoken to in Gujarati by her parents and Desi friends, though she generally responds in English rather than her heritage language. Dimple is also extremely concerned about her reputation at school, afraid of how her ethnic and cultural background will affect her love life.

Hidier has stated that the content of Born Confused is semi-autobiographical, having drawn from personal experiences to describe the thoughts, feelings, and memories of the protagonist. Examining the novel as both a memoir of an Indian-American woman and a fictional account of a Desi teen striving to conform to American cultural and linguistic practices, we can discern many similarities between Hidier, Lala, and the teenagers discussed in Shalini Shankar’s article “Speaking like a Model Minority: “FOB” Styles, Gender, and Racial Meanings among Desi Teens in Silicon Valley.”

As Shankar explains, Asian Americans are lauded for their high levels of education, economic self-sufficiency, low crime rates, and positive social contributions (268). Based on this information, many Caucasian Americans view Asian Americans as the “preferred” minority population in the United States. Focusing on Desis (South Asian Americans), Shankar outlines the two categories that comprise this “model minority” group: FOB Desis (“fresh of the boat” immigrants) and popular Desis (assimilated immigrants).

FOB Desis are generally second- and third-generation, middle-class teenagers whose parents are non-skilled workers. According to Shankar, FOB attributes include not following fashion trends, having oily hair, speaking Punjabi (or other heritage languages) at school, and speaking Desi Accented English (270). These Indian teenagers are easily distinguishable from their popular Indian counterparts, though school officials admit that they often confuse Desi students for Hispanic students due to the comparable shades of their skin (283). As Shankar elaborates on the linguistic practices of FOB Desi students, who are often perceived by educators as possessing a low proficiency in the English language, most of these teenagers have one parent or live-in relative who isn’t fluent in English (283, 272). The result is a high proficiency in their heritage language and a speaking style classified as Desi Accented English, setting them apart from popular, Americanized Desis.

On the opposite side of the stylistic and linguistic spectrum, Shankar characterizes popular Desis as upper middle-class teenagers whose parents are well-educated and have upwardly mobile careers (272). Most of these parents were educated in English-medium schools and tend to speak English at home, causing their children to speak English frequently with their relatives and friends (272). In the process, these families relegate the use of their heritage languages to community gatherings and conversations with elders.

Keeping in mind these categorical distinctions, Shankar analyzes the roles of gender and race in the stylistic and linguistic practices of FOB Desi teens. Her primary conclusions are the following:

• Females tend to regard school space as public while males regard it as private (276).

• Females generally refer to Bollywood films for pop culture and style markers while males refer to hip-hop music (276).

• Females are more concerned than males with maintaining their positive reputations (276).

• Females avoid using profanity while males tend to use it excessively, particularly in group settings (278).

• Females use Punjabi (or other heritage languages) to embellish details when recounting stories to friends while males usually use native languages when discussing violence, especially in front of English-speaking school officials (280).

These enlightening conclusions can be applied to Tanuja Desai Hidier’s Born Confused. The protagonist, Dimple Lala, dislikes the forced interaction with highly superficial American and Desi teens at school because she is unable to relate to them. Lala also works to maintain her good reputation within the South Asian community in her town, attempting to dress fashionably, but not provocatively, and equalizing her language use between English and Gujarati. If you have never seen a Bollywood film or heard Hindi (the language spoken in most Indian movies), I have included a video below from one of my favorite films, Kal Ho Naa Ho. The song, “Maahi Ve,” is common of modern Bollywood music because it incorporates English phrases and has an upbeat tempo—two characteristics that were established in Bollywood music as a result of American influences.

For many South Asian Americans, this balancing act is a reality in their tight-knit communities. As a result, many stereotypes have emerged about Desi American practices. A Facebook group entitled “You Know You’re Brown When…” highlights several of these conventions (preceded by a disclaimer that they “are not meant to be taken seriously”), many of which are also noted by Shankar. Number one reads, “You tell your parents you got a 98% [on an exam] and they ask what happened to the other 2%.” In her article, Shankar outlines the model minority ideal of academic achievement, labeling it a “normative standard that pervades everyday life” for Desi students (270). Later in the Facebook group’s comprehensive list of humorous and slightly offensive stereotypes, number twenty reads, “Your parents are panicking if you aren’t married when you turn 25.” Shankar emphasizes the importance of marriage to young Desi females in her retelling of a conversation between several girls regarding marriage proposals they had recently received (276-277).

As an Indian American, I have felt the pressure to excel academically. Desi parents value education above most other pursuits that challenge teenagers in the United States because it helps their children attend prestigious universities, acquire high-powered jobs, and (if a marriage is not arranged) find an equally motivated spouse. Although my parents don’t plan on searching for my future spouse through our network of South Asian relatives, they do stress the importance of academics. To a certain degree, I can relate to the teens in Shankar’s article because of the expectations of the Desi community in my town; however, the South Asian population of my area is quite insignificant when compared to the Hispanic and Caucasian populations.

Shalini Shankar’s article “Speaking like a Model Minority: “FOB” Styles, Gender, and Racial Meanings among Desi Teens in Silicon Valley” discusses the characteristics of Desi students in the United States. While many of these traits facilitate educational achievement, there are many that contribute to the categorization and separation of these teens along stylistic and linguistic lines. Yet; there is much we can learn from the determination and dedication of Indian Americans who are obtaining a Western education while maintaining their culture in the melting pot that is the United States.

Cool or Cringe?

by Tamara Whitehouse

This music video for Hey Ya by the band OutKast is a perfect example of someone intentionally playing with identities, and ultimately remaining unscathed.  In the first forty seconds, we hear Andre 3000 and his companions speak using African American Vernacular English (AAVE) characteristics, but he is somewhat incongruously dressed in a nerdy style- he’s wearing a button down shirt, a tie, hideous plaid pants and suspenders, all classic and stereotypical tenets of nerd fashion.  This nerdy style, however, seems to remain unmarked by the general audience of the video- I, for one, never noticed that he was dressed nerdily until I was trying to think of illustrative videos for this blog posting.  He still seems cool, likable, and even if it’s noted that he’s not wearing the same casual clothes his companions are, this is not a bad thing.

It seems that the ‘coolness’ and ‘street cred’ that is given to him based on how he speaks overrides the perception we receive from how he’s dressed.  In fact, how he’s dressed might even be considered cool, just because he's cool.  He might be creating a trend with his plaid pants and suspenders.  I propose that a negative can become a positive when the negative action or signal is performed by the ‘in’ group, or by someone who has such a high level of ‘cool’ status that even doing something typically ‘uncool’ (such as wearing nerdy clothes) does not threaten their underlying coolness, and can even reinforce it.  The stigma of being a nerd does not ‘stick’ to Andre 3000 because his singing has AAVE characteristics, which outweigh all else.

Jane Hill describes in detail how AAVE is perceived as being and representing ‘cool-‘ which she defines as “sexy, edgy unflappability” that is highly valued in modern American pop culture (Hill, 166).  Those who use AAVE can claim “desirable qualities,” particularly hypermasculinity (only desirable among white people) and street credibility. Usage among white adults can make them “seem more youthful and in tune with the latest styles in popular culture,” (Hill, 167-168).  AAVE appropriation can lend “desirable qualities” to white people, and an odd and uncomfortable disconnect exists between the coolness of AAVE characteristics and the boundary at which such characteristics become negative- too gangster, too black, too non-Standard (Hill, 169).

On the other hand, AAVE on its own does not give ‘coolness’ to everyone or in all cases.  There are limits and boundaries- the usage of AAVE has to be judged as authentic and natural, otherwise it is cringe-worthy and does a disservice to whoever uses it.  For my first example of this phenomenon, I present to you: Kevin Federline.

This interview includes such cringe-worthy phrases as “you know what I’m sayin’” and “when me and the wife are beefin’ or somethin’ like that.”  They aren’t cringe-worthy on their own when spoken by someone we expect to hear it from, but coming from Kevin, they suddenly are.  He comes off as inauthentic, fake, and pretending.  Why?  Part of it, surely, is simply that he is white- but I hesitate to say that’s the only reason, because white people can use AAVE without being pegged as inauthentic, or at the very least, without being pegged as being quite as inauthentic as Kevin.  Another reason may involve who he’s associated with: Britney Spears, his then-wife.  Though she had changed her public image by then to be more adult, no one can ever forget where she started- bubblegum pop music that’s as far from the world of rap music as country is.

Speaking of which, let’s visit my second example: N*SYNC’s cringe-worthy music video for the cringe-worthy song, “Pop.”

The video is bad, with random break dancing and hundreds of cheering white people, but the lyrics make it truly horrible- “why you wanna classify,” “worry ‘bout yours ‘cause I’mma get mine,” and my particular ‘favorite,’ our lovely Justin Timberlake singing defiantly about “the ice around my neck.”  In my opinion, Justin Timberlake can't say ‘ice’ without sounding absolutely silly- he is simply not a part of that culture, at least not during that period of his career.  The song is trying too hard to be cool, to mimic AAVE styles of speech, to enter that world, and therefore it fails.  It becomes, instead, almost a parody- white boys poorly appropriating black culture, making it look ridiculous because they look ridiculous.  They can’t pull it off, but they’re so earnest in their attempt.

N*SYNC are no more convincing in the roles they appropriated than Kevin Federline is.  They both have associations with white culture, perhaps even superwhite culture, that are just too strong.  This results in their performance of black culture being seen as an obvious disconnect.  On the other hand, even though Andre 3000 wears ‘white,’ ‘nerdy’ clothing in his video, which would normally set him apart from the black culture typified in AAVE stereotypes, his usage of AAVE throughout is not marked or suspect.  This could, again, be due to multiple factors.  His companions, at least in the first forty seconds, are wearing more typical street attire, which gives them, at least, credibility in their language usage.  This credibility may rub off on Andre.  The man who introduces the band on the television is white and wearing very classical, white styles of dress, and speaks in a very Standard manner- which could provide a clear contrast between the two differing forms of speech, making Andre’s speech stand out even more as clearly AAVE influenced.  Further, and perhaps most basic and fundamental, Andre appears to be African American- therefore, his use of AAVE is expected and unquestioned.

The Infamous "N-Word"

By: Krystal Flores

A few days ago, Professor Rosa showed the class a couple of interesting YouTube videos regarding the use of the “n-word,” that at first left people speechless, but then sparked some rather interesting conversation. Discussions about the “n-word” always come along with the question of “who gets to use it and why?” 
      So let us go back to last Wednesday in Bobst room LL151 around 11:45a.m. when this video was played for us in class. At the shocking moment of two minutes and thirty-three seconds into the video, Jennifer Lopez, or JLo as she is most often referred to as, drops “the n-word.” Yes folks. That is correct. JLo said “nigga.” Now let us take a step back and analyze this for a minute. She is Puerto Rican and from the Bronx, which some would say gives her enough “street cred” to use it. However, even so, numerous people were upset by the comment and could not believe that she used it. 

Next up, to complicate matters a little further, as Professor Rosa put it, we were shown this video of one of Fat Joe’s hit songs Lean Back, where he uses the “n-word” a countless amount of times. The point of this video was to show the ways in which Fat Joe can say the word and not be marked for it, and yet again re-analyze the question of “who gets to use it and why?” 

The most important thing to note within these two cases is the type of music each artist is making as well as the type of audience they get portrayed to. Jennifer Lopez, although Puerto Rican and from the Bronx, has not once in her whole career come across to me as this street girl with any kind of street cred whatsoever. She was never this girl that came into the music industry and needed to be trained on how to be “standard,” or “less ghetto.” I understand how this may sound because it seems like I am trying to say that if you are from the Bronx you must be “ghetto,” but that is not it at all. The only purpose of me saying that is just to show that Jennifer Lopez was not a Pop music star, being portrayed to a white audience, because that is what the industry made her do, that is who she is. She is not from the street and she is not ghetto because no one can hide their “true colors” for this many years. The point is, if JLo was really that hood, she would not be able to conceal who she really is for this long, and she certainly would not need to come out with songs reminding her audience that she still is indeed from the Bronx. “Don’t be fooled by the rocks that I got, I’m still, I’m still Jenny from the block.” JLo, no you’re not. You would not dare to step foot in the Bronx just to visit your old neighborhood. Let’s be real.  

Now Fat Joe on the other hand, although he is also Puerto Rican and from the Bronx, works from a different rule book than JLo does. Hip Hop music and culture is so different from all other genres of music because of how raw and authentic it can be. Although I am sure there are people out in the world that think Fat Joe should not say the “n-word,” his use of it goes unmarked a lot of the time because the word has become so adapted into Hip Hop culture throughout the years. It may sound wrong, but I put the “n-word,” in the same word category as “queer,” in that both words were once considered to be so derogatory, but somehow throughout the years, became reclaimed by their respective groups. Again, just as a little disclaimer, not everyone feels this way, but most do; there are still some black people that do not feel that the “n-word” is a good word to say, just as there are still queer people who would rather use another word to refer to their sexuality. 

In this video, Fat Joe is questioned about his use of the “n-word,” and responds in some rather interesting ways. He discusses that where he is from and the lifestyle he was involved in, embraced the word as a term of endearment. Calling someone the “n-word” was a way of recognizing them as your brother and close friend. He also talks about how blacks and latinos are one in the same; they face the same types of discrimination and come from the same neighborhoods. Fat Joe and JLo simply differ in their personalities, in my opinion. Maybe JLo did use the word many times, but when approached about it she backed away from the conflict and embraced the idea that it was wrong. Unlike Fat Joe where he stood up for his position and basically said where he is from, there is nothing wrong with it. 

A discussion of the use of the “n-word” outside the realm of only African Americans using it, would not be complete unless I mention authenticity. Within many of the articles I read for class, almost all the scholars touch upon authenticity and whether or not the language people use is authentic for their ethnicity. In my opinion, authenticity is not fully based on your ethnicity, but more so on where and how you were raised. Therefore, I do not think that Fat Joe is trying to act black or prove anything to the black community with his actions because for him, it is a normalized term. For Fat Joe, the “n-word” is not derogatory and so it is much more socially accepted in the contexts that he would use it in. However, Mike’s language, from Cecilia Culter’s article “Yorkville Crossing: White Teens, Hip Hop and African American English,” would most likely be looked down upon if he went to the Bronx because he is not authentically the person he is portraying himself to be. He is a white teen from Park Ave in New York City; people who live on Park Ave do not call their colleagues as the “n-word.” Park Ave and the Bronx are two completely different cultures. Mike is imitating, faking, and trying hard to emulate his favorite rapper on television, meanwhile Fat Joe grew up in a certain environment that shaped him to be the way he is. Mike was raised in a “standard-English” speaking home, so for him to speak AAVE the way he does, he is using some much needed effort. 

Wiggas: A Growing Youth Population

By Lizzy Mirisola


            In “Yorkville Crossing: White teens, hip hop and African American English,” Cecilia Cutler explores the adoption of African American Vernacular English (AAVE) by white middle class American teenagers who may be expected to use something more reminiscent of Standard English (SE) instead.  Cutler observers a friend’s son, Mike, as he matures during his teenage years, and readily adopts AAVE, both as a linguistic style and as a lifestyle, participating in gang activity in New York City.

            Mike goes through several phases in his adoption of AAVE and a sort of ghetto-ized, African American lifestyle.  The first, which occurs around age 13, is his disassociation with groups he considers “racist” against African Americans (aligning himself with African Americans and other low income minority groups though he is clearly white and wealthy.) This intrigued me because included in the groups he singles out are people of Jewish descent, a minority population that has faced widespread discrimination historically.  And yet, Mike views them as racist against African Americans.  This seems to suggest that perhaps money plays a part in this dichotomy Mike is forming in his head between those who are “with African Americans” and those who are “against them.”  Additionally, Mike tries to distance himself from his high-income neighborhood by using his brother’s Brooklyn phone number.   Cutler notes that this behavior is common for users of hip-hop online chat rooms, who are often middle class but try to align themselves with signs of poverty instead.

            Mike’s behavior becomes increasingly violent during his teenage years, and his language increasingly reminiscent of AAVE.  He creates a “tag name,” joins a (predominantly white) gang and uses drugs.  He gets into trouble numerous times. These are behaviors often associated with low-income Black and Latino culture, and distanced from upper-middle class activities of white children growing up in New York City.  However, even as Mike transitions back to a lifestyle more typically accepted of a white, middle-class college student as he ages, his violent tendencies remain intact, begging the question, was Mike really affected by a desire to fit into a certain culture or was he predisposed to this kind of behavior all along?

            It’s unclear whether Mike’s path would have ultimately been very different had he not chosen to align himself with African American, urban culture.  However, what is clear is that the general trend of white youth seeking to align themselves with African American, urban culture, particularly through the use of language and style is widening to include even younger age groups.  Case in point: Matty B, the up and coming eight-year-old rapper.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0MlyMP6p4-U&feature=relmfu

            In the link above, Matty B covers Pitbull and T-Pain’s “Hey Baby,” a song marketed towards an adult audience with an interest in rap and hip-hop, music genres historically developed and patronized by urban populations, often of African American or Latino descent.  Using phrases like, “gotta flow now, like a pro now” and “my friends are watchin’.  They hear us talkin’” Matty B portrays what many people would consider “ghetto” impression.  He uses his hands in the same way famous rappers do by throwing them forward dramatically, attempts to deepen his voice (emphasis on the word attempt) and shortens words in a typically AAVE style.  Even his name suggests an allegiance with well-known rappers who often shorten their names to nicknames, don’t utilize last names and abbreviate using letters.  Matty B’s case is particularly interesting because of his age.  In Cutler’s article, she cites contact with kids from the Bronx, Harlem and elsewhere and street culture in general as the probable source of Mike’s transformation.  However, it seems difficult to discern where Matty B, an eight-year old from what appears to be American suburbia, would have picked up the cultural cues to be able to align himself with rap culture originally reserved for low-income, urban neighborhoods.  It’s a safe bet that the media had a strong hand in this, and perhaps Matty B’s parents and friends at school. 

            Matty B has other videos as well, one in particular where he covers an Eminem song which creates a multi-layer effect of “wigga” culture, some asserting that Eminem himself is a wigga. 

http://www.youtube.com/mattybraps

            In the Eminem cover above, we are able to hear Matty B speak as he would normally, when not rapping.  The difference between what I presume to be his alter ego of Matty B and his more natural state (when he’s speaking to his sister for instance) is quite significant.  There is certainly a façade being created by his rapping persona.  In additoin, as Matty B teaches his little sister phrases like “cheeyea,” we see the culture being extended to yet another, and younger age group.

            I feel like this post wouldn’t be complete without the obligatory Justin Bieber shout out.  Perhaps the most successfully marketed child star ever, his dance moves and clothing style (shown below) are noticeably reminiscent of African American/Latino Urban culture.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SoYGALN4M8&feature=related

Here, we see Bieber “dougie” and “jerk” (the first a dance move developed during the 1980’s by rapper “Doug E Fresh” and the second a form of inner-city dance developed in southern California (Urban Dictionary)).  Both moves are unexpected of, though extremely well performed by Bieber yet the entire scenario seems somewhat contradictory, particularly given the gaggle of presumably “tween”-aged girls screaming and near-fainting each time Bieber whips out a new move.  A situation that likely would have been characteristic of an inner-city dance battle or concert is mapped onto an entirely different demographic here.  It is an odd juxtaposition.  In addition, Bieber’s clothing style is markedly urban (his pants struggle to stay up throughout the duration of his performance and his consistent tugging is a move often utilized by those in the rap business.)  Bieber, who only recently turned 17 and whose fans range in age from infanthood to adulthood, demonstrates the success crossing over can bring.  He seems to be inherently contradictory of what we as society expect, based on the racial dichotomy that has developed in America of “whiteness” and “blackness.” 

Appropriated Desirable Identities vs. Perpetuated Negative Image

by Elizabeth Baik

Today, forms appropriated from African American English permit Whites to claim many desirable qualities, especially preferred forms of masculinity. These include toughness, urban "street-smarts," and especially "cool," a sort of sexy, edgy unflappability that has a very high value in contemporary American popular culture. (Hill, 166)

[...] while they lend to the White people a "cool" identity, they simultaneously index dangerous negative stereotypes. These stereotypes of African American males mean that the extraordinary rates of violence in African American communities and the incarceration of a very high percentage of African American men are considered by many Whites as merely consequences of their essential nature. (Hill, 169)

The logic and otherwise relevant subtleties that bring about this phenomenon of the continuous cycle--of mannerism producing images producing mannierism--are still unclear. How can an image that perpetuate a negative stereotype for one group be assumed by another group and turn into something desirable? This post intends to investigate first the validity of Jane Hill and other linguists' argument that African American English is appropriated by Whites who "pay no dues, but reap the psychological, social, and economic benefits of a language and culture born out of struggle and hard times" (Smitherman 1998: 218). Example from popular media will be used to illustrate the abovementioned benefits of a language and culture--how individuals speak in a particular way, specifically African American English, to better appeal to an audience. Notwithstanding such advantages provided by speaking African American English, however, it is apparent that the positive and desirable image is only achieved in very specific situations with a particular set of conditions, and that the negative image remains negative even for White men in society. Thus, it is not so much that a negative image becomes positive for White men and other outsiders, but rather that the negative image is thought to be interesting precisely because of its negativity. Outsiders do not seem to acquire African American English to assume an identity but in order to momentarily, or at most temporarily, be in character whether they deliberately or accidentally perpetuate and aggravate negative stereotypes of African Americans.

The video below is by luanlegacy. Its 1.5 million views and 23 thousand 'likes' show how much what may be called the Youtube population appreciates, approves, or otherwise tolerates luanlegacy's opinions. Numerous comments on the video quote memorable or impressive things that is said in the video, those that are noteworthy for either its content or the feisty manner by which it was delivered. Following are few moments in the video that I personally found intriguging or relevant to the subject at hand-- speaking African American English:

0:38 They got no type of self esteem

0:52 Slam this bitch

1:24 The bitch was clingy. I don't do clingy

1:44 I mean, it aint gonna be pretty cos relationships go bad

2:39 because I can just be like, "fuck you, nobody asked for your opinion, nobody asked you to be born"

With limited understanding of linguistics, it is difficult to pinpoint the source of resemblance between luanlegacy's way of speech and African American English. As Culter dissected Mike's acquisition of "superficial phonological and lexical features of another dialect," perhaps there are features of the AAVE grammatical system: third singular -s absence, habitual be, systematic copula deltion, R-lessness, TH-stopping, etc. (431) Among the phrases listed above, "they got no" and "it aint gonna" are two of the most popular sentence structures of AAVE imitated by outsiders. Besides, luanlegacy's intonation, speed, hand gestures, facial expressions collectively contribute to his portrayl as a 'diva,' a term often associated with opinionated, vivacious, loud African American women. The way he slowed down and lowered his voice to say, "I don't do clingy," followed by the rather smug facial expression is definitely considered African American mannierism. Also, though he talks relatively quickly throughout the video, "nobody asked for your opinion, nobody asked you to be born" is said extremely fast, a speed at which African Americans often talk at. All of these things help luanlegacy to deliver his message, to be persuasive and heard, even to make his videos popular and widespread. Imagine if he spoke in proper English with even intonation, perhaps said the same message in a scholarly way. As persuasive as his argument may be in this video, if at all, the Youtube population would not have acknowledged luanlegacy's talent in public speaking. His African American English benefited him.

On the other hand, luanlegacy's way of speech was advantageous for him only because he was recording a video that he posted on Youtube. If he were to speak in another form of public domain or to address a different audience, such as businessmen and women, his argument would have held less validity as it was largely based on specific words (ie. fuck) charged with meanings that the Youtube audience would immediately accept and understand. As mentioned earlier in this post, the negative image of African American English remains, albeit more appealing to a specific audience. Indeed outsiders can effectively claim desirable qualities that has a high value in contemporary American popular culture, but it does not mean that these desirable qualities become positive when assumed by White men and outsiders.