I agree with the following definition of "good," or successful art: A piece of work which fulfills the intention of the artist. That is a totally fair criterion for judging work.
That being said, I do not believe that the Bay Area has many successful artists at all, and the reason is thus: most of what comes out from bay artists is "art" which is created with the intention of mass appeal. This is evidenced by the fact that if you compare the albums' lyrical content with what's winning in the game right now, you'll see they are VERY VERY SIMILAR. Both 50 Cent and Messy Marv rap about the exact same shit.
On the other hand, you take an artist like Mac Dre. His lyrics were entirely trite and simplistic....but his intention wasn't mass appeal, or to make a backpack classic. His intention was to produce an ecstacy experience for a select group of fans, and he was largely successful.
Lets take a look at the Frontline album "Who R You?" Ski used a lot of neptunes-esque synths and hand claps to make some clubby beats, and Left/Lock primarily worked on punchlines throughout the record -it resembles the Clipse album in that respect. Furthermore, it was even RE-released with brighter EQ'ing, and more radio friendly tracks. It's easy to determine the intent. That album was clearly created for mass appeal.
Was it successful, or "good," according to this intent? No, it wasn't. The album didn't catch any ears further than Kansas City, and it lost steam even after its re-release. So, with all due respect, they ultimately failed, and the art did not fulfill its artists' intent. The Frontline album "Who R U" was not good.
So I ask you all to name an album in the bay, BESIDES MAC DRE, which was "good" according to, and ONLY to the artist's intentions.
That being said, I do not believe that the Bay Area has many successful artists at all, and the reason is thus: most of what comes out from bay artists is "art" which is created with the intention of mass appeal. This is evidenced by the fact that if you compare the albums' lyrical content with what's winning in the game right now, you'll see they are VERY VERY SIMILAR. Both 50 Cent and Messy Marv rap about the exact same shit.
On the other hand, you take an artist like Mac Dre. His lyrics were entirely trite and simplistic....but his intention wasn't mass appeal, or to make a backpack classic. His intention was to produce an ecstacy experience for a select group of fans, and he was largely successful.
Lets take a look at the Frontline album "Who R You?" Ski used a lot of neptunes-esque synths and hand claps to make some clubby beats, and Left/Lock primarily worked on punchlines throughout the record -it resembles the Clipse album in that respect. Furthermore, it was even RE-released with brighter EQ'ing, and more radio friendly tracks. It's easy to determine the intent. That album was clearly created for mass appeal.
Was it successful, or "good," according to this intent? No, it wasn't. The album didn't catch any ears further than Kansas City, and it lost steam even after its re-release. So, with all due respect, they ultimately failed, and the art did not fulfill its artists' intent. The Frontline album "Who R U" was not good.
So I ask you all to name an album in the bay, BESIDES MAC DRE, which was "good" according to, and ONLY to the artist's intentions.
