RIP Gil Scott

When such an influential person, it's interesting how everyone's individual sadness regarding death adds up to a wonderful celebration of their life full of video postings on FB, message board posts, people pulling out old CD/DVD/books/etc to reflect by themselves and with others...

On the other end of the spectrum, I remember browsing through Barnes and Noble with my old junior high english teacher. He pointed out a poem in which someone bumps into a homeless person and the writer notes that "this was the last time anyone on Earth would think about this person."

Food for thought.

I find it odd that not one of the obits that I've yet read on Gil Scott-Heron (and I've read about 4 of them now) make any mention of his bigotry and homophobia - up to and including the New York Times obit that I read online. I haven't even seen any posted comments to this effect.

For example, the NJ.com obit (linked to above) makes mention of Gil Scott-Heron's "legacy of social engagement through music", and that he "challenged the domination of oppressors" and other such statements, and even goes so far as to link Heron strongly to Langston Hughes:
"Langston Hughes, the star of the Harlem Renaissance of the '20 [...] exerted the most profound influence over Heron, and it is not an exaggeration to see Heron as Hughes' direct successor."

Langston Hughes is pretty widely known/assumed to have been homosexual - or at least it's guessed at pretty widely, considering he was not open about his sexual life. Therefore you might expect there to be a mention of the paradox this presents.

I'll admit that the only Gil Scott-Heron album that I've heard in its entirely is his first one "Small Talk at 125th & Lennox" - which is a great album in many respects, but it contains the pretty virulent track "The Subject Was Faggots." I find this song actually somewhat more offensive than anything homophobic that I've ever heard on all of the many NWA, Eminem, Geto Boys, Ice Cube, etc albums that I'm familiar with. Most hip-hop artists, even the most socially conscious ones (from The Last Poets up to Immortal Technique, both of whom I rate pretty damn highly in most regards), are guilty of writing truly awful and bigoted anti-gay lyrics, and peppering their songs with demeaning or violent references to gays. That Gil Scott-Heron song is, however, the only rap/spoken word/hip-hop song that comes to mind (at least for me) which is EXCLUSIVELY dedicated to anti-gay sentiment.

As I say, I'm unfamiliar with the rest of his discography beyond that first LP - maybe he changed and/or apologized.
And (perhaps sadly) I'm not saying that bigoted or violent or sexist or racist or homophobic lyrics have stopped me from loving a lot of music that I consider musically/lyrically awesome despite being morally reprehensible (I love watching horror movies too, but that doesn't mean I support chainsaw murders, zombie attacks or demonic possession, in case you're wondering).

My point is that I'm surprised that these GSH obituaries aren't even MENTIONING this contradiction, in what you would hope would be the most basic objective journalistic counter-balance to the praise of his social and artistic achievements. There may be plenty of praise which I think he deserves, but a summation of his life's work and social impact is really painfully under-researched or awkwardly white-washed if it doesn't mention the homophobia along with the list his other legacies to hip-hop and culture in general.

I'm SURE there are obits and articles currently circulating which do in fact address this, but that doesn't excuse the oddness of the ones that haven't.

To clarify - I know that obituaries are generally meant to be positive celebrations of a person's life and work, and not necessarily meant to double as muck-racking, and I can see the point in perhaps not mentioning that he never washed the dishes or he crashed his car a lot or whatever (I'm making up those examples). The problem here is that these articles all go on and on about his social commentary and his artistic work to address oppression, all of which is directly related to issues of what his lyrics actually said about society and oppression. I'd say that the negative content of his work becomes relevant as well in that context, and it's an example of both poor journalism and poor morals to completely ignore this.

(Please do correct me if there's later work of Gil's that confronts this in a different light. Without knowing his full discography I can't say I'm doing such good journalism myself.)

I don't think "Faggots" was part of his lasting legacy. If press and fans alike aren't mentioning it, that should tell you something and possibly encourage an exploration of his subsequent releases (I actually don't know his work well, but the folks who seem to know his work and lament his passing all have good heads on their shoulders). Perhaps it is such a minor footnote at the beginning of a long career that it's not worth mentioning in an obituary. I think unless you can find a way to mention something like that in way that fits in proportion to his positive legacy, it just serves to inappropriately discredit someone. If one were to attack a group like NWA, you could say that their consistent and perpetually negative attitude is a more worthy target.

I think that, especially when we are younger, we all get a chance to grow. If (in another universe) I reached the level of fame where my death warranted an obit in the Times, I don't think it would be journalistic counter-balance to mention the things that came out of my mouth before I knew better.

It's kind of like mentioning that MLK had a thing for the ladies.

To me it seems like the poem is more description of the Balls, which were / are a big deal in Harlem, rather than just homophobic, which it also is. It seems odd today, but Bohemia was very homophobic in 1970, and while it may have been unusual to use "faggots" in a poem, the open revulsion would have been an OK sentiment to espouse amongst Gil's peers. In the 60's, the preferred word used by the Downtown, turned on, crowd to identify gays was "fairy", which is not as harsh, but still weird now.

Even the Village Voice printed homophobic articles in the 60's!

I would highly recommend the documentary "The Queen", as well as "Paris is Burning".