Why Criticising "An" Odunsi Is Harsh, But Necessary
Artistic expression, be it through music, art, photography or any other form is the subject of holistic articulation and us fans have attached an unnecessary metric of ‘depth’ to art appreciation.
Kendrick Lamar lines get unnecessary interpretations of meaningless concepts that serve no purpose. Photography and paintings get judged on shallow metrics of empirical relevance and terrible veiled symbolisms. ‘Beauty’ has become a generic term to which a pattern can be attributed.
Last year, a guy defined Nigerian contemporary photography in a tweet. He said, "All you need is shoot a woman roasting corn or shoot old buildings in Isale Eko, then add black and white filter and your art gets adjudged genius." Harsh, yes. But true, nonetheless.
For writers, it's about relating touching, empathetic stories through our pieces. Towards the end of my article on Mike Shinoda's Post Traumatic, I admitted similar things. It's a gyre we can't escape, and a standard we can't but adhere to. In truth, you feel better when your personal experiences are articulated in your pieces.
To be honest, we aren’t the first generation to be embroiled in this malformed mêlee. Art works like the Monalisa, others by Leo Da Vinci, Manet, Monet, Van Gogh or even Basquiat, currently commanding ridiculous amounts on the open market are just regular oil paintings that grew in value over sentiment and reputation of their creators.
They have no special attachment when we judge by what art should be.
I see people talk about the representations of contradictions in The Monalisa or Schroedinger's Cat and sometimes, I just want to say ‘shut the fuck up.’
Other times I see the neo-impressonist artworks of Basquiat and barring a few, all I see are terrible attempts at paintings, mirroring cavemen epitaphs, deep in medieval enclaves, or embedded inside rocks. But then, maybe I just don't understand momentary impressionism.
Some people will say I'm not woke enough, or too cynical, but good art will appeal to artistically inclined people almost instantaneously, without extra effort, even though certain details might require closer evaluation to decipher.
The common denominator is unnecessary attachment of depth and meaning, aroused by unnecessary need to create superiority or maybe, it's because there can never be a total consensus a piece of art - in this case, a holistic endeavour of music making - is good.
Like rappers of today, classic appreciation increased over attachment of depth to those guys' works.
Make no mistake, some of these artists intended these meanings, but think-pieces and elevation of art through lavish praises and contemporary, elitist reviews of art expression in all forms didn’t start with Pitchfork, DJBooth or Pulse. It was also inherent in art reviews through ancient Rome and Spanish modernism.
The idea of minimalism also promoted quantum appreciation in and attributing meaning to earnest art. While defining what is art will always be of subjective connotation, and meaning, a metric to judge good art, "depth" has grown to be some elitist factor to basic understanding of art.
It continued with food critics and other types of critical analytics experts across other walks of life.
The cumulative effect of this; art acceptance and critique breed expectations, and expectations breed myopic metrics of appreciation, that in turn breed a predictable pattern of ‘cool’ which everyone hopes to adhere to.
In consequence, this creates a regurgitation. When Artist G discovers that 80-90BPM sounds, complete with low synths and synced vocals were a shoo-in to critical acclaim and claim to freshness for Artistes A, B, C, D, E and F, he wants to do the same.
The reason is simple; art is a game of sentiment and critiquing. Opinions makes some critics feel special. They forget it’s not about them, but the art. Hence, they attach unnecessary baggage to it for allure, and picture perfect views. But then, will we leave meaning out? What is good art without meaning? Nothing.
Hence the conundrum, but we still have an out. But first…
The response to Nigerian alte acts
Know this, meaning doesn’t have to shrouded in "depth" and veiled symbolisms. It also doesn’t have to be emotive to be relatable. While empathy is the greatest vehicle for relatability, empirical relevance and conveyance of circumstantial lifestyle of debauchery we all crave are known to rustle the thalamus.
In essence, relatability shouldn’t be a product of conformity and limitation. But we can’t stop people from being sentimental with empathy.
While art evolves and, contemporary conversations and voices of time inspire art, regular tendencies to roll out faux standards have long been the achilles of art appreciation and critique.
Sadly, when art gets boring and cliché, and regurgitation becomes our reality, artists also bear the brunt.
On July 10, 2018, I found this tweet;
My response was "Ouch". I instantly understood his perspective and he is right. Art these days seem a recurring gyre of woke aesthetic Formula 1 and phony optics.
The Nigerian altè music sphere [and general art community] is going through a revolution I like to call radicalism. It’s leaders are trying to create aesthetics through freedom of expression and free living, where previous rules of beauty, acceptable behaviour are jettisoned.
It operates on the belief that in freewill lies true expression of artistic inclinations and that anything can be good. While that is true as what is art is a product of subjective connotation, exploitation is a problem.
This exploitation comes when we try to force aesthetics through everything or create forced avant-gardism or aim to create nonconformism through sensitive issues like mental health or poverty.
As noted earlier in this piece, another problem is regurgitation and everything that leads to it.
Alternative Nigerian sounds are almost of predictable sound patterns; African percussion at 80–90BPM, accompanied by emo, cloudy strings, guitar riffs and stories that touch or familiar samples and reworks of old flames. It’s what sells, but it’s also what we want and it’s why they keep giving it to us.
As I said earlier, it's sad because when the sudden need for newness strikes the madness of the audience again, artistes will start scrambling for newness. It's why some people never recover from the highs they achieve during a trend.
Nasty C, one of the most talented African Rappers I've ever heard in my life will probably die with this trap wave if he doesn't start inventing. Slimcase seems on a fasttrack to obscurity because almost every Nigerian contemporary dance sound has Slimcase on.
For a minute, Terry Apala was fresh because of his African, avant garde, Apala sound, straight from the Nigerian classic folk locker. Us fans raved like no tomorrow, but as Joey Akan, then of Pulse.ng noted in 2017, he could soon run out of time and it seems he has.
The concept of time is about a recognition of the need to realign to avoid becoming a living cliché, or in this case, get brandished an exploitation of avant-gardism.
Though Apala might have been careless with management of his time - a critical factor; recognition of your moment - he failed to reinvent himself and a lot of people got tired of regurgitation. The mainstream that could have kept him alive never got to witness his freshness.
While identity and influence count for something, longevity and dynamism are sometimes the key to legacy. Freshness is where relevance is born. It's why Drake always seems relevant - he's never stagnant.
It's crazy how predictable Nigerian alté sounds are. It's also crazy how the totality of art expression is so myopic in Nigeria. I like the Africanism of art, describing us, but it all gets tiring at times because it's all a repetition or at best, a fine-tuned regurgitation of contemporary objects of cool.
Music videos are intentionally made ‘rough handled’ to reveal the raw, unrefined aesthetic. It was fresh for a while, now it seems cliché. Very soon, fans will start purging - it’s already started - and artistes will again start scrambling for freshness.
I understand, creating isn't easy. It's worse while the pressure is on, but it's the price we all have to pay for choosing what we chose. You can't stay in one place.
"Mental health aesthetic, dirty snickers aesthetic and whatever else" were cool because they were new. We kept getting stuff off that alley because we gravitated to them as listeners, audience and critics - they were different to mainstream art expression and the niche built itself.
It's why contemporary artistes kept trying to fine tune around that standard, but kept giving us similar vibes across board.
It's also telling that exploitation of what the audience craves and of sensitive issues backfire as predictable patterns and regurgitation emerge.
This brings me to my next point; while the artiste himself is guilty of exploitation and regulations, it’s not entirely the artiste’s fault. Us; fans, critics and the audience played our part. What we deem "good" almost always creates a pattern.
It's why an alternative act and trapper might be saying essentially same things, but we judge the trapper as trash and the alternative act as dope. The difference; alternative beats and avant-garde aesthetics. We have gotten sucked into the raging vortex as custodians of the cliché and we don't even realize.
The role of fans and listeners
It's crazy how artistes alone are getting criticized, not us. We created what the standard they adhere to. Of course, it's all subconscious and intangible, but it doesn't require excessive detail to decipher.
Some critics will argue that they played the hands they were dealt and that they're no custodians of trend. While the former is persuasive, the latter is downright trash. Listeners and critics didn't create art, but our opinions and acceptance determine what gets trendy and acceptable.
While it's not entirely our fault either and for appreciation of art, the human subconscious is wired to gravitate toward freshness, and those artistes afford art appreciation, but we should have known. The problem is that we can't know. We only act on what we get offered.
Our tastemaking doesn’t predict, it only judges. Though we are the most important factors, and custodians of what flies, our initiative and proactivity isn’t subconsciously enabled. We can’t actually unless we perceive.
By that, responsibility for freshness falls back on the artiste, just as the brunt of regurgitation will fall back on him, despite not being the only player in the affair.
Like I've said over and again, the greatest cog in any artistic space is the listener/critic. In the grand scheme, anybody's art really doesn't matter because there will always be art to consume. If an artiste wasn't existent, there will be another artiste.
Artistes have a job because of fans and listeners. They need us, we don't need them. That's why catering to our needs determines what is acceptable and trendy. In consequence, we are as culpable as they are for the patterns of exploitation and regurgitation. Artistes were trying to cater to us. We kept endorsing them till we suddenly got tired.
What we can't be blamed for is artistes not recognizing the ephemeral nature of trend and how listeners have short attention spans or what I call Art ADHD. If they did, they would understand the need for constant reinvention.
Nonetheless, even while art is trendy, there will always be cynics. While Nigerian alternative culture is still in full swing and will be for another 2-3 years, even these early saunters into Africanism needs freshness, not regurgitation.
They should tell our stories, not engage in cliché. That means originality. Asides pacesetters, documentation remembers worthy art, not contributors to the wave and riders of trend. Even pioneers require reinvention to avoid fading away.
I understand, there is the issue of brand. After all, Micheal Dapaah AKA Big Shaq's new song Man Don't Dance isn't as successful as Man's Not Hot because it represents an actual attempt at making music than a comical one, straying from his established brand.
But then, brand management also involves dynamism without straying. If your brand can’t do dynamism, it’s a weak brand that will eventually crumble to dust.
Us listeners might be custodians, but the burden of recognizing the need for dynamism behooves artistes more than listeners - who are mostly not wired to predict.
I do however feel some sympathy for the alternative sphere because it's still in infancy. We have only started scratching the surface, and mistakes are bound to happen. While I think that tweet is parts cynicism, I think it's necessary to keep artistes on their toes.
If Odunsi takes absolute exception to it, he's got a problem because he shouldn't. He won't be totally open to it because it's scathing, but he should pick the positives from that tweet. You can crave some understanding from the audience, but you can't always expect sycophancy.
In art expression, greatness is forged in the embers of critical heat. You can't outrun criticism. That tweet was needed, our alternative artists are beginning to take the easy way out, by dwelling on cliché as fundamental base of expression.
You can't do that. Even though generations have pioneers, you can't be generic when your art is steady amassing a following and enjoying vertical acceptance.
We are witnessing a watershed moment in African art with Odunsi and other artists, but it's not enough to stand on the sidelines and watch cliché and exploitation become the standard. If something has to be said, say it.
Art shouldn't be based on irrelevance because you need freshness to represent current realities, complete with some woke attachment for definition. It certainly shouldn't be erratically fixated on dirty sneakers and palm frond aesthetic obsession.
You can “dress well” and still be an alternative artiste. While you need branding, your brand of music is about originality. But then, I know why can’t you dress the way you like? What about freewill? Freewill shouldn’t be your goal, originality should. You can dress the way you like as long as it represents you, and bit the idealist version of what you think you should portray. People will eventually like you for it.
Once you start channelling the art in a way that your own personality is caught in the cross-hairs of pretence, you have failed because originality is gone - the one true fundamental.
It certainly also shouldn’t be overly about your sexuality or mental health. Talk about those things because you need to, you can be a champion for those issues without making cliché of them, I promise you.
Sometimes, you need to go for aesthetics, but there's a tiny, almost non-existent line between scatterbrained articulation of meaning and meaningful, worthy art in avant garde aesthetics.
While representation of real life situations will forever be true art, and very boring to the average man who expects sensationalism, you’re engaging in sensationalism if your art isn’t true and you just want to be cool.
It was starting to seem a bit generic. Aesthetics shouldn’t be myopic. Conversations are required, but not at the expense of killing relevance with tiring regurgitations. Stay woke... Nah, scratch that.
I know. The entire essence of this movement of radicalism is being oneself and finding the aesthetic in self. Once you start catering to public needs, are you doing something differently? Food for thought.
Before you can be yourself, you have to first know yourself and not the idealist representation of what you feel you should be. When you are yourself, someone will gravitate towards you and that lasts longer.
What if your real self is annoying and unattractive? Fine tune yourself without creating a politically correct version of yourself for the optics, losing all the vestiges of what represents you.
Is it possible to be yourself in an industry where people have certain expectations that differ by genre? Yes. Drake is a successful rapper that still raps about how women exploit his soft side in an environment of buccaneering masculinity that places premium on not expressing emotion.
J. Cole keeps a low profile that encourages minimalism. So does Kendrick Lamar, a global superstar whose home is unknown. Being yourself should be your brand, not the idealist representation of yourself. Those eventually fade away.
During the promo run for Beyonce's self titled album Beyoncé, she said she made the song Pretty Hurts over being tired of the constant industry fine-tuning that seek to destroy. During an interview, she even opined that she felt unworthy of her accolades saying "I wanted to break that shit up".
If an industry veteran got tired of circumstantial and idealist personalities, what choice have you? Originality lasts longer.
Stay... Wherever the fuck you want to be. Nigerian contemporary art sphere is having its impressionist phase. God help us all. It’s gonna be a bumpy ride and we ain’t even started yet.
By OneMotolani - PennedMusingsNG for Urban Central (Tweets @OneMotolani)
Remember you can also follow us on Twitter @TheUrbanCentral
If you enjoyed this story, please click the 👏 button and share to help others find it! Feel free to leave a comment below.
