Agency and Structure

The release of two hip-hop albums, one in the form of a mixtape, provides a point of departure for a very interesting and in my opinion necessary debate. Nas, a well-known and extremely successful New York hip-hop artist who made his debut in the music industry in 1994 with the critically acclaimed Illmatic, just released Untitled (an album which was supposed to be released under the controversial title Nigger). Immortal Technique, a much lesser known and as a result underground artist, recently released, along with DJ Green Lantern (who interestingly also released a mixtape with Nas titled The Nigger Tape), a mixtape titled The Third World.

In spite of the differences in production quality, flow, rhyming structures, as well as other musical characteristics which clearly set the two artists apart, what is most important about their two albums is the very serious social issues which they deal with. These include racism, the U.S. war campaign in Iraq, civil liberties, the media oligopoly which controls the information to which we’re exposed, socioeconomic inequalities, the class configuration in capitalist society, and ultimately the web that links political and corporate leaders across nations to form the hegemonic power bloc of the global ruling class. Nas himself says this explicitly in the song We’re Not Alone where he states:

“I think it’s just been recent when everybody started to feel like there’s an elite group that runs everything, and everybody else was sheep, ignorant, making all ethnicities, colours and creeds niggers.”

In his review of Immortal Technique’s mixtape, Emilee Woods, who sees the need to explore commonalities and differences between Nas and Immortal in their two new albums, touches on a divergence between the two artists with a fitting and topical example, namely the upcoming attempt by Barack Obama to become the next U.S. president. I wouldn’t overemphasize Nas’ positiveness towards Obama, as Woods arguably does when he quotes, only in part, Nas’ verse discussing Obama’s potential positive effect on American society. Woods quotes the first part where Nas states:

“But on a positive side,
I think Obama provides hope and challenges minds
Of all races and colors to erase the hate
and try and love one another, so many political snakes”

He does not however finish off the verse, in which Nas claims:

“We in need of a break, I'm thinkin I can trust this brotha
...but will he keep it way real?
Every innocent nigga in jail, gets out on appeal
When he wins, will he really care still? I feel...

[Repeat 2X]

(‘Although
it seems heaven-sent,
we ain't ready, to have a black president’ 2Pac)”

In the second portion of the verse, Nas clearly questions Obama’s intentions to actually remain a progressive figure once he holds the presidential office (and this is of course assuming he will win the 2008 presidential election against McCain, a possibility which Nas seems to think remote, since he finishes off with the memorable Tupac quote from I Wonder if Heaven Got a Ghetto). I think Nas deserves a lot of credit for an insightful analysis of this situation from his point of view, even more so since he does so in rhyme, accentuating his abilities as an MC. But as Woods points out in his review, Immortal is more skeptical still. As immortal states with an ironic allusion to former President Bill Clinton:

“And they might even have a black president but he's useless
Cuz he does not control the economy, stupid!”

Here we see the clear break between the two points of view, and this is where the debate mentioned in the beginning of this piece arises. Whereas Nas, though skeptical, thinks it is within the realm of possibility that a president might implement substantial reform, Immortal deeply disagrees. The underground Latino artist thinks that an individual alone, no matter how progressive in his views, how coherent with them in his actions, and how much power he might hold politically, cannot reform the system (aside perhaps from making it less abusive) to such a degree that it will truly alter the way in which most people live. This chasm is part and parcel of the larger debate between those who emphasize the power of agency and those who emphasize the power of structure. To what extent is our reality constructed by ourselves and to what extent is it the result of historically inherited social institutions and norms that form our environment?

It’s apparently rather difficult to extricate ourselves completely from such a riddle. The safe answer is typically that even though it’s not impossible for the individual to change his circumstances, it’s not a given that this can be achieved either. I personally feel that an appropriate answer requires some clarification. In terms of a conflict individual vs. structure, I am of the opinion that the structure is more influential in that it sets up the individual with a set of circumstances and givens that are often overwhelmingly stronger than any willpower he may have. Consider for instance the peasant of a Third World countryside. Is it really within the realm of possibility that he change his circumstances radically if we consider all the barriers he faces, including those that are historical and psychological in nature and that shape his own worldview? The answer is a resounding no.

This however does not mean that individuals in their collective form cannot alter their social environment. After all, institutions and norms are socially constructed and this requires that they be made by humans, by collectives of individuals. If a sufficient portion of society finds that it is more suitable to change the givens they inherit from their predecessors, it is possible for them to do so. Were they to do so, this would be the result of agency, not of structure, but of a collective agency, not an individual one. In the case of the possibility of Obama president deeply restructuring America, even assuming the most noble intentions (not a small assumption), I am rather skeptical as is Immortal. But I am not so pessimistic (and as far as I can tell neither is Immortal) as to say that substantial change is not possible either. It is possible if the American people decide, as a collective, that this is in their interest.

In any event, whatever the most appropriate answer, I have to say that I welcome such a debate in music as I do in life in general. Most importantly, I especially like the revival these two artists are contributing to in making hip-hop the form of music it was intended to be: a cultural challenge to the exploitative power structure of modern society, and an additional venue for serious questioning of where we’re going as a people.