"are you fellas serious? apart from serving as a in-need-of-serious-editing promo for his memoir how is this article in any way informative? it's empty nonsense. again i have to wonder why these white lib magazines always manage to find the most mediocre of black writers to give some fake anthropological sociological rundown on the word on the street. it's insulting. please stop it."

The article was alright as a back in my day nostalgic trip but, in the end, it was, as you said empty nonsense. Just another variation of "those damn young whippersnappers...blah, blah, blah...". Sure, after a steady drop over the past 16-20 years, there's been a spike upwards in crime in some areas, but the idea that someone who ran the streets at the height of the crack craze when crime was off the charts is now condescending to black urban youngsters about the problems with their</> "code of the streets" is almost laughable. What do you think all those '70s cats who used words like jive were saying about you nappy headed fools running the streets in the 80s? Same as it ever was.

I'm sorry but that's ridiculous. Beyonce and Jay Z should get married however they see fit. The notion that their pending nuptuials, in and of itself, has implications for life on the street is absurd.

Okay, that makes more sense. Must've been old age that caused you to mix up the numbers before? :-)

"First of all, to KStone--yes, absolutely the pending "nuptials" of Jay-Z and Beyonce are part and parcel of the problem. Whether the jigga-man likes it or not--and whether you like it or not-- he has contributed to the culture so accurately chronicled by Matthews in his article. Cutlural icons in white america may have the luxury of not having to serve double-duty as "role-models" (for lack of a better term)--but we, as a people, aren't there yet. Mr. Matthews is able to weave disparate and sometimes contradictory threads throughout his essay which could lose--how shall I put this--a reader who's not able to make the required connections."

First of all, how shall I put this - I know - fuck you "professor". Secondly, the the idea that the wedding of two black celebrities is part and parcel of the problem because the the extravagance of the wedding contributes to the culture of ....is simply idiotic. They should get married in potato sacks at City Hall to please some allegedly "culturally sensitive" fools? Two young and extremely successful black people are getting married and that's a problem?C'mon....

Anyway, it's certainly true that Jay Z is part of the culture of bling, but I find it hilarious that the author is basically saying that "my materialism was better than theirs because back in my day we could possibly afford to get the latest fads while now they are out of reach" and oh by the way, our "street rules" were more honarable than yours. What utter empty nonsense. How in the world can a rational person be "nostalgic" for the crack crazed late 80s in the innercity simply because the bling now is a lot brighter than the bling was then. Especially when it's an objective fact, even including the spike in some places, that crime was much higher then than it is now! I guess it's bad that less people are dying now. It's the relative level of materialism or "currency" in the 'hood that really matters. Btw, only some white cultural icons can avoid the "role model" tag. Athletes tend to get stuck with it regardless of race.

"You don't see a correlation between Reagan/Bush/Bush? I'd agree with you on the "nostalgia" aspect of the essay except for two things:

ONE: things don't seem to have changed all that much, except for, as Matthews says "the currency." If you are an african american reader, where have you EVER seen that conflation? outside of (yawn) Michael Eric Dyson or (yawn) Bill Cosby? As a professor, to me it is the connectivity of ideas which is important to a discussion.

TWO: whether you liked the content of the essay or not, in my opinion--he wrote the hell out of it. As another poster said, good writing can make familiar themes seem fresh. Your "go on girl" digs with "Kim--a black chick" do nothing more than to promote the idea that fresh voices in black thought will be greeted with disdain. I read the peice as an essay, which I expected to be somewhat personal. If you want news, there's an excellent adjoining piece, which--shockingly!--bolsters Matthews' witty personal reflections. Maybe you should start with Oprah-dot-com and work your way up to Salon."

Puhleeze "professor", there's nothing fresh about the author's take. In fact, it pales in comparison to Ta-Nehisi Coate's June 2003 column in the Village Voice called "Keepin' It Unreal", in which, she nails both the rappers and the sort of "nostalgia" the author here enages in. Maybe you should work you way up to it and then you mioght be able to make the required connections.