Michael Eric Dyson’s received a great deal of press lately for his course on JayZ. Previously a course on the sociology of hip-hop, Dyson instead sought to teach the course primarily about JayZ. Of course there are a number of folk who are up in arms because they don’t think JayZ or hip-hop in general is worthy of a class at Georgetown.
I attack this course from a different angle.
Universities are increasingly expected to act like for-profit corporations. They increasingly expect their workers to produce more, and increasingly expect the knowledge production of their scholars to have an economic impact. And they increasingly judge departments on their class enrollments (higher class enrollments translates into more income generated for the university). Public intellectuals like Michael Eric Dyson increasingly act as entrepreneurs, using their own human capital to increase their profile and their income. Dyson himself has his own radio show, is often on the national news, and stays on the lecture circuit.
A class on JayZ, given Dyson’s knowledge of hip-hop, and his personal friendship with JayZ and many figures in the rap game, wouldn’t be hard to prep, particularly given Dyson’s schedule. Indeed the lectures pretty much write themselves. And even though there’s an anti-intellectual narrative that people attach to rap, the reality is that most MCs and people associated with the industry would jump at the chance to give a lecture at one of the nation’s top universities. So it isn’t hard for Dyson to find fill in lecturers (that, incidentally, he doesn’t have to pay).
Furthermore, prepping the lectures, and using the information gleaned through assignments and class discussions, can easily translate into a book or series of books authored by Dyson. Which in turn generates more income, more speaking engagements, more cache, and then higher class enrollments.
Now it’s important to note that this dynamic does generate anxiety, particularly in the minds and hearts of conservatives who believe in a certain vision of the university. But not only is this anxiety NOT usually coupled with a critique of the university’s growing economic mission, the anxiety itself feeds into the class dynamics. The anxiety increases interest in the course, increases interest in Dyson, and increases hip-hop’s cache as a subversive form of popular culture, whether that is or is not the case.
Along these lines the question isn’t whether hip-hop should be taught in the classroom, or even whether JayZ should be taught in the classroom (and to be honest here while I think JayZ is a fascinating figure and the biography he wrote with Detroit native Dream Hampton is brilliant I wouldn’t teach a class solely on him anymore than I’d teach a class solely on Obama). The question is, what are the conditions that make teaching a course on JayZ probable given the neoliberal turn in the American university.
My first thought was how could the course be just on JayZ? I am a huge fan also. As far as scholarship, developing critical thinking abilities about full contemporary issues, its just plain lazy. It smacks of the the modern day mantra of developing one’s “me” brand. I hear that because one can develop multiple income streams in this way, it is considered ‘genius’. Alas.
It’s not “lazy”. It’s “efficient”.
I’ve been going in very harsh and very hard here lately on what the conservatives have labelled the “diversitocracy” within the academy – and whose most visible representatives would be womens studies and afrodemia. Help me out Les, are there any employers outside of the academy or the popular media who value these liberal arts electives enough to hire a subject matter expert in one of these fields?
Seriously, I have to give the side-eye to most STEM graduates knowing the dearth of valuable subject matter expertise they will have acquired in a college or university. Industry applicable domain knowledge in IT is truly only to be gotten hands-on and on-the-job nowadays, with colleges and universities being at best 5 years behind the curve. I’m sure something similar pertains in the professions, as residencies and internships remain de rigeur for most professional vocational graduates, as well.
So, aside from Dyson being able to line his pockets, quick, fast, and in a hurry, is this offering of any value whatsoever to his students, or, is it just more of the self-dealing, self-serving excess I would characterize the overwhelming majority of afrodemia to have engaged in over the better part of its institutionally patronized run?
I’m not at all certain/confident that the public is going to continue eating up the deliverables engendered by this field, notwithstanding the continuing support of mainstream media which hires afrodemics as pundits and commentators – notwithstanding their painful ignorance of science, technology, foreign affairs, economics, or much of anything else.
Do you suppose that in the forever contracting economy up ahead, that afrodemia and womens studies will continue to be institutionally patronized by the academy, or, has it well and terminally served its purpose by channeling and buying off any kind of real and active resistance and activism within the academy itself?
The first question you ask is a serious one. But I’d ask in return, why is that question important? Are there other possible outputs of a university that compete against the idea of producing a “hirable” graduate? Should there be other possible outputs?
I’d also ask you to think about the label “afrodemia”. More specifically I’d ask WHO you think of when you think of an “afrodemic”, and then think about WHY you think about WHO you think about. I’m willing to bet for example that someone like Sandy Darrity isn’t someone who comes to mind. Why?
Although we’re talking about Georgetown, a private university that only gets public funds through grants (and Dyson doesn’t apply for or receive grants), your question about the public is a valid one. But again I’d unpack this too. In as much as students are being burdened with debt, even as they believe that pursuing an undergraduate education is valuable, we are far more likely to see a student uprising against debt than we are an uprising against undergraduate education. And along those lines Afro-American Studies centers remain the most natural place for resistance to grow. Because it doesn’t have the same degree of institutional support and resources other disciplines have it may very well be the first to go.
But I’d ask in return, why is that question important?
Because it means there’s a market capable of assigning value to your outputs.
Are there other possible outputs of a university that compete against the idea of producing a “hirable” graduate? Should there be other possible outputs?
From a student/constituent perspective, yeah, ok. If you’re a legacy with a trust fund and the college experience is only there for your personal and cultural enrichment, sure.
From an institutional outputs perspective, there should be vastly greater, more accessible, and more important outputs than what the past forty years have yielded into the popular domain. It is the absence of these outputs that have me classifying everything afrodemic in the same category of profound disdain in which I hold the lawyers, politicians, pundits, and gatekeeping others who comprise the self-dealing 2nd and 3rd line inheritors of the civil rights movement.
To whom much is given, and all of that…,
I’d also ask you to think about the label “afrodemia”. More specifically I’d ask WHO you think of when you think of an “afrodemic”, and then think about WHY you think about WHO you think about. I’m willing to bet for example that someone like Sandy Darrity isn’t someone who comes to mind. Why?
goin in on the MIT brotha, well played Dr. Spence.
The who is obvious – it’s the loudmouthed know-nothings and do-nothings on retainer to big media who first and foremost come to mind. There is a market (of sorts) for their stylized and mostly safe jiggaboology.
The reason Sandy Darrity is unknown is because he must be dangerously knowledge-able and there’s no big media market for dangerous and/or actionable knowledge of the type I’d suppose him to profess.
And along those lines Afro-American Studies centers remain the most natural place for resistance to grow. Because it doesn’t have the same degree of institutional support and resources other disciplines have it may very well be the first to go.
OWS is protesting student debt, and afrodemics are whining about vestiges of white privilege in OWS.
If afrodemics had had a market-making impact over the course of its forty year run, then somebody would’ve surely by now determined to endow and fund chairs, institutes, and the other institutional trappings of success and market viability in the academy. Shoot magne, sports management programs get that type of funding because their graduates are viable in the marketplace and pay it back for the value that they obtained.
I’m saying here and now that the afrodemic enterprise has failed. Its most well-known representatives (Dyson, West, et al) are a dead weight and a distraction, and that it has been incentivized to dis-serve the very constituents it ought first and foremost to have served from the very moment of its conception. Furthermore, that the template of the handsomely compensated black media pundit is a now longstanding and deleterious model for young black scholars to emulate as they construct their own professional hustle.
as far as i know i’ve only taught and loosely mentored one student you’d know–Charles Woodson. The dozens of others, who’ve gone on to do great things have names, but those names would be meaningless to you. i weighed in on this issue because i think it points to a larger problem. but neither dyson nor dyson’s jayz class represents the death of black studies, nor does it represent an afrodemic malaise. there are far many more sandy darritys and thomas laveists than there are cornel wests and michael eric dysons.
said another way if i focused on the popular domain for what i knew about kansas city, for example, would i have access to ANY information that would lead me to you? how deep would i have to go to find proof of a resilient progressive school network in the middle of nowhere that is kc?
i weighed in on this issue because i think it points to a larger
problem. but neither dyson nor dyson’s jayz class represents the death
of black studies, nor does it represent an afrodemic malaise. there are
far many more sandy darritys and thomas laveists than there are cornel
wests and michael eric dysons.
neato – do you all lack a critical mass of public-facing influence and erudition because you principally value your personal anonymity and want to be able to continue making it rain at Cheetahs – or – has the afrodemic “establishment” failed to aggregate anything of tangible public value for reasons similar to those that have rendered black professional athletes from aggregating a stable institutional investment fund?
You tell me why y’all to whom so much has been given have in turn proven capable of giving so very little back? Seriously brah, afrodemia couldn’t even keep it on and poppin at blackprof.com – HOW PATHETIC IS THAT?!?!?!?!
said another way if i focused on the popular domain for what i knew
about kansas city, for example, would i have access to ANY information
that would lead me to you? how deep would i have to go to find proof of a
resilient progressive school network in the middle of nowhere that is
kc?
whachoo talkin bout Willis? I’m try’na stack my lil paper and keep my anonymity intact so’s I can go make spring showers at the club every now and again. Seriously though, you wouldn’t find any such network outside of a handful of folks furiously agitating, organizing, and implementing everything in our reach to make it so.
That “handful of folks” constitutes a network. Even if anonymity didn’t work for you, even if you weren’t being tactically anonymous…what would cause me to believe there was ANYONE working in Kansas City on this issue? I know Detroit like the back of my hand. Because of that I know the work that folk like Grace Boggs and even the Shrine are doing. But if I were betting the house on seeing something in “the popular domain” I’d be broke every time.
Which is why I suggest that looking at “the popular domain” is deeply problematic if you’re looking for evidence of “giving back”. And why I’m not sure that public-facing influence is the best indicator either. I figure I’ve taught and “progressivized” dozens of doctors, lawyers, and future professors. These folk have saved lives, have innovated new medical techniques, have kept kids out of the joint, and have gone on to powerful careers. And while not all of us have this mission, those who take what we do seriously have worked hard as hell to humanize the academy to make it a better place to live, work, and grow in.
Now it’s very possible these endeavors don’t count. But the question then becomes “why?”
I know Detroit like the back of my hand.
Stop playing mang. You once “knew” Detroit like the back of your hand and may have once had the means to influence issues, events and personalities on the ground, but realistically, you no longer have the means to do so. I can’t even begin to tell you the number of academics and journalists I reached out to concerning the devil incarnate now wreaking havoc in your former backyard – and on a statewide basis – new, improved, and more powerful than ever – and with the assistance of his full coterie of evil imps.
Which is why I suggest that looking at “the popular domain” is deeply
problematic if you’re looking for evidence of “giving back”. And why I’m
not sure that public-facing influence is the best indicator either.
Given the protection of tenure, the afrodemic is THE SECOND MOST PROTECTED profession available to black americans (after preachers) for addressing the public wrt to knowledge and information required to sustain democratic decision making and to influence public perceptions. We needn’t even go into the manifold failings from behind the pulpit, but for the best educated, best trained, and economically safest and most secure to fail folks en masse – as they have done for the past 40 years – is utterly inexcusable.
And while not all of us have this mission, those who take what we do
seriously have worked hard as hell to humanize the academy to make it a
better place to live, work, and grow in.
Yeah…, I make the crusty critters in my neighborhood association ack right too, but I don’t much count that as “giving back”.
Now it’s very possible these endeavors don’t count. But the question then becomes “why?”
From the best trained, best educated, safest and most economically secure members of the collective, de minimis engagement is practically equivalent to no engagement at all.
you misunderstand my comment about detroit. i didn’t make it to state how much influence i had. i don’t really roll like that.
we disagree on the role of “afrodemia”. you can group folks together in as many ways as you want intellectually. but in realpolitik it doesn’t make much sense. how many tenured black professors are there in kc? what specific departments are they in? what type of work do they do? and then within these departments what are their responsibilities–do they chair the department? within the school what are their responsibilities? and then what aspects of life in kc are they expected to tackle? how?
now we’re just talking about kc. a city with a population of less than 300,000. multiply that. we’re somehow expecting a group of folk to somehow take a vanguard role in diagnosing and putting into practice an agenda not simply of a city but of an entire country?
i don’t hold much truck in “afrodemia” because, being in the belly of the beast i know no such thing exists. there are black tenured professors, with individual research agendas. it is hard enough to get black tenured professors to work together on specific projects at a given university–which in as much as it has black people in it IS a community. these problems aren’t uniquely black, but rather are the problems associated with getting ANY group together. the best we can hope for is to get group together for specific projects, that last for a moment and then have spillover effects. EVERY success we’ve had to date relies on THAT model, rather than on an afrodemia vanguard model of some sort.
lol, you know you my boy – you and your clan always welcome at my house for shit, shaves, showers, and a rib-sticking meal or several.
But here’s the thing, there’s a civil war underway in which you and your colleagues look for all the world like self-dealing cowards.
in realpolitik it doesn’t make much sense. how many tenured black professors are there in kc?
The Chancellor of UMKC is black, an MIT graduate, and a friend of mine. As for the professors, there are a handful, none have full tenure, and they are as administratively and professionally cowardly as I’ve come to expect most of afrodemia to be.
what type of work do they do? and then within these departments what are
their responsibilities–do they chair the department? within the school
what are their responsibilities? and then what aspects of life in kc
are they expected to tackle? how?
rotflmbao…, that has to be the most nutless cluster of kwestins I’ve seen in a month of sundays brotha…,
these problems aren’t uniquely black, but rather are the problems
associated with getting ANY group together. the best we can hope for is
to get group together for specific projects, that last for a moment and
then have spillover effects. EVERY success we’ve had to date relies on
THAT model, rather than on an afrodemia vanguard model of some sort.
That well explains why y’all are so collectively non-alpha and consequently irrelevant to the dynamic change agenda currently in play in popular consensus reality.
In the Limelight: Professing Jay-Z – The Hoya http://t.co/vbxsfGNR