Sylvia Robinson Dead

The Afronaut · Post by **The Afronaut** » Fri Sep 30, 2011 12:57 pm

Mindbender Futurama wrote:it's like yeah sure Joe Jackson provided the discipline to make Michael Jackson the superstar he became... but do we give the man props for fucking savagely beating his son? not quite.

At what point in this thread has anyone said Sylvia Robinson deserves props for being shady?

Thun · Post by **Thun** » Fri Sep 30, 2011 1:01 pm

The Afronaut wrote:
Mindbender Futurama wrote:it's like yeah sure Joe Jackson provided the discipline to make Michael Jackson the superstar he became... but do we give the man props for fucking savagely beating his son? not quite.
At what point in this thread has anyone said Sylvia Robinson deserves props for being shady?

Never thought I'd say it, but you seem to have missed Mindbender's valid point.

The Afronaut · Post by **The Afronaut** » Fri Sep 30, 2011 1:06 pm

Thun wrote:
The Afronaut wrote:
Mindbender Futurama wrote:it's like yeah sure Joe Jackson provided the discipline to make Michael Jackson the superstar he became... but do we give the man props for fucking savagely beating his son? not quite.
At what point in this thread has anyone said Sylvia Robinson deserves props for being shady?
Never thought I'd say it, but you seem to have missed Mindbender's valid point.

How so? Does her shady (yet standard) business dealings somehow make her one major achievement (which I have said since my first post in here) not count? What the hell?

Thun · Post by **Thun** » Fri Sep 30, 2011 1:29 pm

The Afronaut wrote:
Thun wrote:
The Afronaut wrote:
Mindbender Futurama wrote:it's like yeah sure Joe Jackson provided the discipline to make Michael Jackson the superstar he became... but do we give the man props for fucking savagely beating his son? not quite.
At what point in this thread has anyone said Sylvia Robinson deserves props for being shady?
Never thought I'd say it, but you seem to have missed Mindbender's valid point.
How so? Does her shady (yet standard) business dealings somehow make her one major achievement (which I have said since my first post in here) not count? What the hell?

Not sure what you mean by "not count" but yes, it sullies her legacy considerably.

Is it unfair to concentrate criticism for shady music biz on this one particular woman of color in a mostly white/Jewish, largely male controlled industry? I can see that.

I think what Mindbender was getting at is that an uncritical celebration of this woman is inappropriate, even when eulogizing her. The practices being "standard" and her level of notoriety do not cancel out her transgressions, and we shouldn't just pretend otherwise. There is no moral ground to be gained by idealizing her or her legacy. Celebrating her life without noting her wrongdoing is equivalent to endorsing that wrongdoing. We don't have to slander her or drag her name through the mud in a manner disproportionate to her crimes, but she's far from an angel, industry wise.

Try not to react so quickly and put words into my mouth that weren't typed here.

The Afronaut · Post by **The Afronaut** » Fri Sep 30, 2011 1:41 pm

Thun wrote:I think what Mindbender was getting at is that an uncritical celebration of this woman is inappropriate, even when eulogizing her.

Try not to react so quickly and put words into my mouth that weren't typed here.

This is what I wrote.

The Afronaut wrote:Im not sure about her shady dealings and whatnot once things got going, but on the real her legendary status should not be argued by anyone. She had a vision that most (including the founders/artists of that period etc) did not see.

Anyway, RIP.

It was not an attempt at an "uncritical celebration" of her life, it is an acknowledgement that despite her bullshit, she brought something significant to rap as a whole.

Im almost tempted to say that if she werent a woman yall wouldnt even be acting like this. I feel like Ive seen Puffy's (as one example) approach defended on here.

Case in point:

Thun wrote:The success that these artists did achieve = largely due to Puffy, especially in the case of those with little intrinsic talent

The failures of these artists to continue this success and the weird turns their lives took = not easily attributable to Puffy except by way of slander with little evidence

For context: http://www.philaflava.com/forum/viewtop ... ight=puffy

Jaz · Post by **Jaz** » Sat Oct 01, 2011 12:25 pm

http://coldrockdaspot.blogspot.com/2011 ... ylvia.html

Thun · Post by **Thun** » Sat Oct 01, 2011 2:17 pm

The Afronaut wrote:Im not sure about her shady dealings and whatnot once things got going, but on the real her legendary status should not be argued by anyone. She had a vision that most (including the founders/artists of that period etc) did not see.

It was not an attempt at an "uncritical celebration" of her life, it is an acknowledgement that despite her bullshit, she brought something significant to rap as a whole.

If it wasn't an attempt at uncritically celebrating her life, you managed to succeed anyhow. I still don't understand what your point is here or how it addresses her critics, none of which are in denial of significance or impact.

You might consider actually familiarizing yourself about the topic at hand. This book explains everything in detail: http://www.amazon.com/Big-Payback-Histo ... 0451229290

Before you respond, the fact that you already admitted to being unfamiliar with the topic doesn't work in your favor.

Im almost tempted to say that if she werent a woman yall wouldnt even be acting like this.

Pure speculation, followed by a poor example.

Case in point:
Thun wrote:The success that these artists did achieve = largely due to Puffy, especially in the case of those with little intrinsic talent

The failures of these artists to continue this success and the weird turns their lives took = not easily attributable to Puffy except by way of slander with little evidence
For context: http://www.philaflava.com/forum/viewtop ... ight=puffy

You didn't examine that context in that link much or you didn't think it through. Firstly I wasn't defending Puffy's morals. I was responding to the claim that Puffy's business tactics (different from Sylvia's, which you haven't even read up on) were solely or mostly responsible for the inability of his less intrinsically talented acts to maintain a level of fame and visibility through the 90s. I didn't claim that there was no case to be made against Puffy or that some of their failure wasn't linked to his dealings or that anything he did would survive moral scrutiny or that his legacy should not be viewed as blemished.

Context, huh?

The Afronaut · Post by **The Afronaut** » Sat Oct 01, 2011 4:23 pm

Thun wrote:If it wasn't an attempt at uncritically celebrating her life, you managed to succeed anyhow.

Okay, I can accept that I "somehow" succeeded and saying something I wasnt intending to say. Misinterpretation happens all the time and is even more likely on a message board.

However when "asked" for clarification (using quotes because Emp certainly did not ask) I in no uncertain terms stated that I was not applauding her for any of her record exec actions. (Largely because, as I pointed out initially and you have reiterated, I am unfamiliar with the specifics.) I responded to Joe Jackson/Sylvia analogy because I felt like it was a weak and false analogy since I'd never said her shady dealings were okay to begin with.

From there you say I missed his valid point. HOW SO? I acknowledged that she did shady record exec shit. And while Im sure that the book in question goes into GREAT detail on the ways she did so, at the end of the day she was not "literally beating" them as Joe did Mike, right?

My point from the very beginning was that while apparently she participated in everything short of literally beating the shit out of every artist she ever came in contact with at Sugar Hill records, she is STILL largely responsible for the creation of the entire industry, and that should be acknowledged AS WELL as her shady exec work".

The only reason I brought up "context" as far as SR goes is because people were on here acting like they'd never heard of a shady record deal before...im like what the hell?

Rule #4080 has been known well before Sugar Hill records was even a thought. So while Im not saying ignore that completely I am saying "well for "Hitler in a dress" she certainly did something really significant (in a positive way) as well."

Puffy: If that was a bad analogy within the context of that or this thread, cool. Ill renege on that. Toss it out of the discussion.

Now, if that doesnt address what you've said here, Ive completely missed your point and am still willing to hear you out. I just dont know what the hell Im missing. If you feel like dumbing it down some more just shoot me a PM.

Tweak Da Leak · Post by **Tweak Da Leak** » Sat Oct 01, 2011 5:23 pm

My nigga thun doesn't seperate the artist from the art? we can't celebrate this Robinson's achievements because of her shady dealings? We can't celebrate MJ's music because of who he was? Niggas read Burrough's work even after he was molesting african kids daily.