For better or worse, The New Yorker stood its ground in a similar gaffe on July 21, 2008, in which the magazine's cover featured false depictions of Barack and Michelle Obama. Unlike the Ni**er debate, print and digital commentators engaged in widespread discussion on the cover's satirical qualities: a key element that was missing in Nas' approach.
Whether you embrace "ni**a" (and/or reject "ni**er"), hip-hop's self-appointed prophet offers no subtitle or advisory hinting at the important message behind his madness. The New Yorker, on the other hand, having quickly found out that the point was missed, launched a massive campaign to defend itself. Even though most Americans are familiar with the "N-word" debate, to date, few can discuss its merits or articulate Nas' perspective. In the age of YouTube and instant press, this should not be the case. On balance, Nas leaves more questions than answers around the album formerly known as Ni**er.
Slowly but surely, "ni**er" and all of its variants have taken solid root in American discourse, especially in the performance arts. How ironic, then, that a word in need of no introduction is commonly used and strangely misunderstood.
The problem is not that Nas was nearsighted in titling his album as Ni**er, it was that he misjudged the latent ignorance and indifference of his larger audience. Like any confident salesman, Nas assumed that he could provide the Ni**er experience for $13.98 — affording millions of confused Americans an opportunity to wrap their minds around the word "ni**er." Such a grave mistake does not deprive him of making a profound statement, but in the end, when the title is heard more than the lyrics, the satirist reaches no one outside those who probably would have "gotten it" anyway.
Hence, the imprudent "preacher" strikes again.
Hallelujah. Amen.
Article comments
1 - Kevin
I agree, this was a well-written argument. The New Yorker magazine caused a bigger stir because they refused to sensor their cover, although the message was mistaken, it was subject to a massive debate by all mediums. Nas' eventual dropping of the title drastically weakened the message. I've listened to the album many times, and absolutely love the album; but his purpose to diffuse the word most definitely failed. What he accomplished was AWARENESS. The select few who actually listen to this album and get something out of it will undoubtedly be enlightened. As I've defintely researched the likes of Ivan Van Sertima, Louis Farrakahn, his view of women's right's mentioned in "America" The actual interest that those who listen to rap in "white suburbia" actually care for black people, the struggle from slavery to civilization, and the strength that we must have to be able to endure 400 years of slavery and to now dominate nearly every aspect of life, from sports to entertainment to now politics, how America sensors our text books by not highlighting that our American Heroes were undoubtedly slave owners, "Bet she had a nigga wit' her to help her old as*". Rap may not be the best medium to diffuse the word, but those of us who listened to the album and want to make a difference now have the initiative to make the change simply by listening to the album.
2 - JP
Clayton,
This is a good argument.
Nas is one of my favorite artists and always manages to creatively produce a positive message, while not getting too preachy. And at the same time, he seems to have become a master at innovative marketing tactics. his last two albums have been based on themes that are mad controversial, and the titles have reflected this, thus giving him some free marketing in the mainstream press. The more controversy one stirs, the more people are interested.
All the same, I thought Untitled (formerly known as Nigger)was off the chain (content wise). And although I have never heard him explain the purpose of his original title very well, and I was disapointed that he changed the title and gave in to the pressure, it will still be remembered as a very significant piece of history and artistic vision.
3 - TYDIED
There does come a time when the album cuts do become bigger than the album Title, when you're distributor says that no major retail chains will pick up an album called N**GER, you realize that the chips are stacked against you and the decision has to be made right then and there, which is do you kill the product for the sake of the title or do you forsake the title and keep the message flowing?.
We all must remember that a record contract is still in some instances indentured servitude with you master owning your masters.
Yes. NaSir Bin Olu Dara Jones did sacrifice the title but message remained...
ONE LUV