Secrets of the City

I’m curious, Cristina — can you list any specific complaints about the article? What did they feel was libelous?

I note that the CP article contains a disclaimer at the end of the piece entitled: “The above version of this story reflects corrected text.”

Reading the irate comments on the Blotter page, it appears that one of the women interviewed was misquoted in a rather offensive manner and the City Pages pulled the offending quote from the online edition. Presumably not from the print edition though. I shall have to pick up a copy to see what was originally attributed to Amy Sackett.

I also think the CP could have done better with their choice of headline than “Where the ladies at?”, particularly when you look at the rather more restrained approach taken on the Intermedia Arts web page for the event; they chose to go with: “B-Girl Be: A Celebration of Women in Hip Hop”

Here’s where that’s at.

Anybody who’d say “where the ladies at?” is ignorant. Anybody who’d use it as a headline is a racist.

“This looks really sexual. I’m doing Seoul up her butt.”

About a dance move the excellent Amy Sackett was performing with B-Girl Seoul. Cached (temporarily) here.

Certainly, the above quote (misquote) was the primary target; but there were other complaints as well. In the print article, Schultes uses the phrase “Sackett the Sodomizer” to refer to Amy Sackett. I, of course, assumed that this was a nickname she actually went by, but I was told that this is not the case. I have no idea what the truth is, or where Schultes came up with it, but if he did concoct it on his own, then it’s most certainly problematic. The complaints I heard were really about the overall tone of the article and the information Schultes chose to focus on and frame the article around. On the first page, he tosses in a Joan Morgan quote about the “in-yo’-face testosterone” making these women’s nipples hard. I get what Schultes was trying to do, but he oversexualized the story in a crass and unnecessary way. His choice of quotes throughout the entire piece is questionable. He glides over important differences in their lyrics and styles, rather than focusing on these more interesting (and more respectful) aspects. I don’t know the facts, so I don’t know how “wrong” he was; but he did take the cheap way out in his general, ultimately doing these women (and hip hip women in general) a disservice that runs counter to their more politicized mission (an obvious departure from today’s mainstream booty rap that could have been the anchor for a damn fine article).

I read the uncorrected article online, and yeah, I was curious as to why that quote needed to be in the article. It seemed counterproductive to include it in a text that was highlighting female artists’ doing something to celebrate the success of women in a male-dominated industry. Not to mention, Amy wasn’t even the one who said it. The article was OK, but the tone was wierd, like Pete was oh-so-pleased with himself that he was doing a good thing by these women by giving them some press…

Horrible choice of quotes by Scholtes, but having done interviews before, I could see something as simple as him not remembering who was who during the photo shoot, and thinking the person making the statement actually was Amy Sackett.

That said, pulling that quote for use in the article just seems like a sad attempt to add some punch where it really wasn’t appropriate, or necessary. The responses on the Blotter are fairly impressive, however.

I really like that CP has opened up a thread in their blotter on their cover stories each week. And kudos to the B-girls for directly responding — resulting in a change to the article. The internet and the open dialogue can make all news stories a bit like a not-quite-final draft, that people revise through their participation.

Richg: “Horrible choice of quotes by Scholtes, but having done interviews before, I could see something as simple as him not remembering who was who during the photo shoot, and thinking the person making the statement actually was Amy Sackett.”

I believe there’s a well-established rule in journalism along the lines of “if you’re bold enough to use a quote about fucking someone in the ass, you should always make sure you’ve attributed it correctly. “

I agree with teucer…

Thank you, toots. You’re a helluva dame.

I’m curious about how Pete knew it was “Seoul” and not “soul.”

Apparently the B-Girl subculture is very sensitive, and quick to take offense.

Jokes about sodomy are always appropriate, and should be seminated and disseminated as widely as possible.

(Yes, I looked up “seminated” and “disseminated” in the OED while composing this comment. That’s true hip hop, ladies.)

Anybody who’d say “where the ladies at?” is ignorant. Anybody who’d use it as a headline is a racist.

please go away.

Read a bit of the female rapper piece for some reason.

Seems like female rappers want the same thing that female athletes want, a la Title IX, the ability to swagger around and act like jerks, just like the men.

All to the good they seem to think.

Rat- hmm…interesting, but I read it as they wanted access to the industry without having to trade on their sexuality and the opportunity to earn respect as artists without everyone bringing up the fact that they’re MC’s, graffiti artists, etc with tits.

What’s frustrating about this article is that it’s supposed to frame this big event, but it doesn’t connect the dots between the breakdancing ladies of the ’80s, and this big shindig going down. Instead, he talks about boobs, and wankers, and is generally kind of smug about it, and apparently fucked it up pretty bad on the first go-round. Color me unimpressed.

Isn’t “Where the ladies at?” just a catchy line from De La Soul’s “Dinninit”?

The answer is “we’re chillin’ over here.” Please update your records.

Regardless of what people may think of this piece, Peter has long covered the local hip-hop scene more thoughtfully and completely than anyone else in town. He’s not the enemy.

That’s true, just sayin’.

24th & Blaisdell, you are my new comedy hero.

Regardless of what people may think of this piece, Peter has long covered the local hip-hop scene more thoughtfully and completely than anyone else in town. He’s not the enemy.

Well then he should know better.

Who caresssssssssssssssss

Just sayin’, you are entirely correct. Secondly, it is not a journalist’s job to pick and choose quotes that make their subject “look good.” It is their job to tell a story. And the only thing Peter did wrong was attribute a joke quote to someone else.

Peter has always had one of the most generous hearts of anyone I’ve ever known, and he is an incredibly astute student of culture and the hip-hop scene. He approaches it like no one else, with both the passion of an artist and the brain of an accountant, endlessly cataloging and noted everything.

Dismissing him for attributing a quote to someone else, an off-handed joke comment at that, is sort of like assuming the person who said “up the ass” is an idiot. It’s small-minded, knee-jerk, and entirely wrong.

It seem like we’ve all become so myopic, so stuck in our little worlds, and so reactionary on message boards lately. The bigger picture is that Peter was telling a story, and he did a good job of detailing the history and current state of b-girls in the Twin Cities. It wasn’t his job to do their publicity, but to approach it like a journalist.

And, uh…derrrr….Excuse the typos. I was in a writing frenzy. I mean wirithgn frenzyei.

One more thing: Before throwing around accusations of “libel,” perhaps we should check the definition. To be “libelous” means that you acted with actual malice, as in an attempt to harm one’s reputation, and that it has been proven that one’s reputation is damaged because of it. Peter made a mistake; he was not malicious.

I don’t mean to add fuel to the fire, but Peter also has a solid reputation to protect here. Don’t stone the guy for a simple mistake.

Molly- I do agree with you that Pete does an outstanding job at covering the local hip hop scene (since no one else seems to really want to) and I almost always enjoy his articles, there was something about this one that just kind of rubbed me the wrong way. Not so much that Amy was misquoted, just the fact that the quote was even in there at all. It seemed out of place and unnecessary to me.

Sorry, MollyP, but you don’t know the libel law. The actual malice test only applies to public figures (NY Times vs. Sullivan.) That pretty much means politicians and people who occupy such a position in society that it is in the interest of society that comment not be limited.

Simply being false and defamatory is good enough for most people. Also, I am fairly there’s a special provision in Minnesota law that considers impugning the sexual virtue of a woman. You can’t mitigate special damages by a retraction when that is the original libel.

guess we know who heads up the “PS I Love You” Fan Club.

Grote, if by “PS,” you mean Peter Scholtes, then you are incorrect, sir. I used to be head of the Phil Spector fan club, until he went and killed someone. (How embarrassing!) Now it’s the Paul Schmelzer fan club I run.

I want to be the VP of the Paul Schmelzer fan club.

Nope…it’s for “Preening Sycophant” I kid..I kid.

tom quotes libel statute like my neighbors quote the New Testament.

The sad voice of experience in this area.

LOLNerds.

I don’t see it, but was the change in the online version a retraction or did City Pages simply change it? I think it is putting the cart before the horse to say this was a misquote if there hasn’t been an official retraction. Don’t put Peter on a rail until he actually gets a chance to retract/apologize.

to earn respect as artists

From who, other purveyers of polysyllablic profanity? And for what? Don’t forget one of the women got slugged by one of these Savage Young Capitalists?

I take it back. Next to that the ability to train and sacrifice to score a soccer goal, swim strongly and switly or land a crisp right cross looks downright noble.

I wouldn’t classify that guy (her attacker) as an artist, though…

Don’t see a lot of art going on in the rap world.

Like much art, a matter of opinion.

Did you know that a lot of people regard Thomas Kincade’s pictures as art? I know! But tastes vary, don’t they, Rat? One man’s orchestra is another man’s cacophony, and all that.

I think there are some objective definitions that can be accepted by most.

Those who don’t accept them often want to be called artists without actually having deal with the training and the discipline.

Merely being able to loosely rhyme lyrics between profanities doesn’t make the cut for me. That’s merchandise not art.

I tend to not make broad generalizations about things I am almost totally unfamiliar with.

Count me as another fan of Pete’s work, particularly of his coverage of local hip-hop. No one comes close to him and his passion is pretty obvious.

I can’t help but wonder if someone higher up might’ve had a hand in sexing up the story? Editors have been known, from time to time, to muck up a story.

I think Mr. Sparber is dissing you, teucer: to use hip-hop terminology.

The Rat wrote: “Merely being able to loosely rhyme lyrics between profanities doesn’t make the cut for me. That’s merchandise not art.”

Sounds more like poetry to me. Can poetry even be art? Come to think of it, a lot of poetry doesn’t even rhyme (viz. Walt Whitman, as he was mentioned earlier today).

I guess there must be a pretty clear cut definition of art in Rat world. I’d be happy to play a game of “art/not art” with you sometime.

“Those who don’t accept them often want to be called artists without actually having deal with the training and the discipline.”

So being a trained professional is what makes the difference between the output of an artist or a non artist?

What about the opinion of trained artists? Or art critics and historians? If someone with a trained eye says a particular painting is art, does that negate your opinion on whether it is or isn’t?

FYI: City Pages has responded to the complaints. As per Peter, here’s the correction and apology posted earlier today at Blotter, which will run in Wednesday’s paper.

Sorry, it’s Friday, let me rephrase the following:

“So being a trained professional is what makes the difference between the output of an artist or a non artist? “

That should read: “”So being a trained professional is what makes the difference between the output being art or not art? “

Teucer- I was just going to say that! The type of hip hop I enjoy is more poetry than profanity peppered with misogyny. I’ve always said that I love hip hop rather than rap, and yes there is a difference in my mind. I couldn’t do what many of these performers do, I wish I could, tho!

I’m always delighted to meet someone who has a solid and unbreechable definition of what does, or does not constitute art. Typically, I find these things to be a continuum, and there will always be people at either end making artistic claims to their perspective (or lack of it).

Actually, I’m always delighted to meet anyone who has an absolute definition of almost anything. It must be interesting to have that level of certainty. I’m hoping Rat can teach me a thing or two.

As far as I’m concerned if you want to call yourself a painter you better be able to draw.

Singers are entertaining. Musicians are better. Songwriters make the charts. Composers are artists.

But there are exceptions.

“As far as I’m concerned if you want to call yourself a painter you better be able to draw. “

I’d think being able to paint would be a more valuable skill. Similar skill sets, but different. And not all great paintings start with sketches, although many do.

“Singers are entertaining. Musicians are better. Songwriters make the charts. Composers are artists.”

It seems to me like you’ve collected four generalizations and herded them into an opinion, one completely unencumbered by empirical data. You should at least recognize this.

Furthermore, I’m assuming that this opinion is an untrained one, so presumably in Rat-world the opinion of someone who went to, say, Juilliard trumps his? Therefore, if someone from Juilliard says that the piece entitled 42333 (4 minutes and 33 seconds of silence punctuated only by ambient background noise) by the trained composer John Cage is art, you’d agree? Well, you’d have to, wouldn’t you? After all, that’s a musical professional giving his opinion on a composer. And composers are, after all, artists.

At least you can give us a clue as to what constitutes your measure for deciding what’s OK/better/best? Popular opinion? Critical opinion? What about cultural opinion?

“But there are exceptions.”

Ah yes. There always are. That doesn’t seem so absolute now, does it? There are lots of exceptions. And a lot of people think that the exceptions are actually the rule. And still more people think that there aren’t any clearly defined rules.

That would be Cage’s 4′33″. In case any of you were planning to rush out and buy it.

It seems to me like you’ve collected four generalizations and herded them into an opinion, one completely unencumbered by empirical data.

So, if I ask you an empircal data question, you’ll give me an “esseance of art” answer. And if I ask you an “essence of art” question you’ll give me an empirical data answer?

Sorry, I don’t work that way.

And still more people think that there aren’t any clearly defined rules.

Yeah, those are incovenient.

I prefer his song “As Slow as Possible,” which is still playing in Halberstadt, if you’d like to hear it.

Well you haven’t asked me any questions at all. What you’ve done is made “I” statements without much in the way of supporting evidence. So I find myself forced to try and evaluate your opinion statements without much in the way of help from you. I’m trying to understand why your opinion is any more correct or valuable than anyone else’s.

Perhaps if you defined what art is, that would be helpful?

Max: That organ sure has some staying power.

Perhaps if you defined what art is, that would be helpful?

Probably not. But when art stopped being about beauty and form it became something other than art. When it stopped transcending mankind and starteded degrading mankind.

Rat, just to summarize, I’m having problems with a definition of art as “whatever Rat likes”. Do you see why that might be?

That’s what she said.

Max: Kevin will be so proud.

Some astounding art came out of WWI and from the holocaust. One of my favorite poems ever written was by an Auschwitz survivor, Primo Levi, but it scarcely elevates mankind. And is there no art to be found in the small and mundane? David Hockney’s Splash is a picture of a Californian swimming pool, which is pretty much moral neutral I’d say.

Man is not always a lofty, transcendent animal. In fact, we hardly ever are those things. We fight and screw and drink and talk and do laundry. Are you saying that there is nothing worthy in capturing these experiences in artistic media? Can’t art provide insight into the human experience?

Or are you saying, in a roundabout way, that you don’t see anything edifying in rap or hip hop music because there’s a lot of misogynism and violence? Or that nothing of merit can be found in the spoken (or rapidly spoken) word when the topics are hard to deal with? Surely not.

All this talk about hip hop as art is getting me hot…wait, did I say that aloud?

I am of the opinion that drinking and screwing are lofty, transcendent activities.

Max, speaking of drinking. . . I saw your BottleGang piece on the new Bank restaurant/bar.

I worked there in that classic building early in my career, when it was Farmer’s & Mechanics (F&M) Bank (category: federal mutual-savings bank, not a savings-and-loan). That big main room was busy with a long teller row and personal-banker’s desks and higher-ups offices.

To many here in the Twin Cities old enough to remember, that was the bank that handled the “School Savings” accounts: In grade school you’d put into a red F&M envelope your nickel or dime or quarter for the week (or month, I can’t recall). That’s where the bank got a lot of its adult customers from, just as carryovers from those early savings accounts.

Hear hear, Max…

Anyway, to summarize my side of this argument and bring it back around to topic, yes – a lot of rap and hip hop glorifies violence and is misogynistic. And have you seen that beautifully executed and classically-referential painting The Rape of The Sabines, by Nicolaus Poussin? How about Klimt’s Danae, an eroticism of a myth where Zeus forces himself on a sleeping nymph? Is that transcendent apologism for some of what is worst about humanity or is it OK with you just because you like the technique?

There is also a lot of uninteresting rap and hip hop that is thoughtlessly derivative (as there are in almost ever other music forms). Neither of those things invalidates either rap or hip hop as a form of artistic expression.

I don’t like most of the violent aspects of gangsta rap, nor do I like its misogyny but I know enough about both and their various fusions and crossovers to know that it’s ignorantly wrong to say that all rap or hip hop is that way.

Nor is it good enough to say that it’s without any merit as an art form just because you don’t like what you’ve heard. You might not like it, but that doesn’t mean your definition of it as art or not art is any more valid because you like Puccini. Or Herbie Hancock. Or George Gershwin. You may be familiar about what was said about Jazz during its inception, or during the Second World War.

Just because your ears can’t hear the skill or the technique required in rap or hip hop does not mean that they are without either. It may just mean that you don’t like it, or that the form does not speak to you.

And that’s quite enough from me on this. I was self indulgent because it’s Friday evening and I’m procrastinating and hardly anyone else will read it anyway, because of the weekend.

I urge you to reconsider. I’m not asking you to like the music if you’re ideologically opposed to it. I’m just asking you to consider that art may be quite a bit bigger than the narrow constraints you initially seemed to place on it. After all, if you can’t define it, how you can say what it is or isn’t?

Now all we need is a pandering MNspeak black person to praise country music.

Just apply the same arguments to country music. Nothing to do with color, everything to do with taste.

teucer preaching on musical genres = good.

Not too surprised actually.. I rarely read a CP feature anymore. I’m usually turned away by the awful cover photography… shot by the art director. If the art director is busy shooting feature stories (you can tell by the lack of art direction in the rest of the paper), then it isn’t too surprising that the editors are off doing something other than editing.

photo snob, the error was one of reporting/notetaking, not editing.

I loved the part where Bartel pwned MollyP on the journalism thing.

Joe C, I wouldn’t call it “pwned.” I’m not a lawyer, so I don’t want to argue semantics and differences between “malice,” “negligence,” and “due care.” The bottom line is, Peter Scholtes is one of the most conscientious journalists I’ve ever known.

MollyP: Huh. I figured the “perhaps we should consult the dictionary” line was, in fact, SOME sort of indication of your desire to argue semantics.

(I won’t — perhaps — direct anyone to the dictionary for a definition of semantics.) ((Because the dictionary would explode?))

Thanks for glossing the bottom line, though. Whew.

Not only did Peter admit making a mistake, he linked to people slamming him in his own blog.

Pretty cool.

1. Teucer, is that a photo of Banksy’s work? Did you read the profile of him in the New Yorker?

2. Secondly, it is not a journalist’s job to pick and choose quotes that make their subject “look good.” It is their job to tell a story.

Independent of the issue at hand, the two aren’t mutually exclusive.

Ha. These ladies should try politics, that’s where the real misquoting at.

Yup, that is a Banksy rat. I didn’t know the New Yorker had profiled him – that’s quite amazing. I shall have to track it down. The last interview I read with him (although I’m a bit out of touch) was in Swindle magazine. I like Banksy, he makes me laugh.

I like Banksy, he makes me laugh.

Have you seen the articles on the graffiti war going on in NYC? (Sorry need to subscribe most likely.)

Some rogue group is splashing paint on things that are done by writers that do art on the side and make a profit. There have been at least two articles in the Times. One of the pieces that was splashed with paint was a Banksy. I like his stuff too, especially the stuff on the walls in Israel.