everybody knows deep down in their hearts what is underground and what is not underground. I never understood why we need other peoples definitions to know what underground is when we already know.
Skwatta Kamp - Khut n Joyn was an underground album. I think nobody can deny that. It had commercial success, songs like RAU RAU were on the radio, had a video, and i believe it sold relatively well.
Mkhukhu Funkshen on the other hand was a COMMERCIAL ALBUM. It was a GOOD ALBUM but it was not underground.
There. Not hard is it ?
hey, and then? the tone?
this is a good example and thanks for that. just one more thing here, if skwatta made another of that particular album, directly following it (hypothetically, for all intents and these here purposes lets a**ume its doable), with great commercial success. would that still be viewed as underground, just with commercial success then? what im getting at is this, if you continue to create in the same vein, moving from a place of being identified in this way, but with greater 'above ground' success, perhaps without compromising that much on your artistic integrity - who are you then.
its easy to take in when its simply a matter of breaking through and being fresh with it, thats easy. but there tends to be this other stuff that comes through. thats why you'll have these kinds of questions.
also aint nothing wrong with continuously interrogating our understanding of these things. lets keep that open. the thing is this, i dont think its necessarily about wanting other peoples definitions, in substitute of our own, never that. its simply to try hook into the greater thought, coz now now we are coming from completely different places. your view may enhance or alert me to a blindspot i may have. and i dont always know bra, sometimes its all just so inconsistent that what is in my best interest, is to ask.
panic, sure okay. until i come up with another one. i hear you - ish. chuckle.
