dan mentioned frank ocean being his fav and he started talking about chanel and i got so so so excited but then he said "it's about sex and money" and completely overlooked the bisexuality theme and it made me feel weirdly sad. frank ocean did not struggle with his sexuality as a black rapper for dan to say "it's beautiful and poetic but has the same themes as every trashy song" like what the fuck.
ahhhhh i’m sorry his assessment of it made you feel so negative :( i have to admit that i interpreted his review of the song a bit differently from you! i thought dan was basically saying that franks lyrics are superficially about opulence and wealth and the sort of hypermasculine grandiosity that hiphop always celebrates but that the lyrics are actually incredibly complex and poetic and deeper than what that superficial assessment would suggest. which is true. frank writes the song to basically talk about how these masculine tropes don’t fit him at all and that they’re actually toxic and consuming. he mentions his lover having a feminine appearance but that he feels he needs to show his masculinity through aggression and fighting. he basically makes fun of rich and famous people throughout the song. but it’s easy to miss if you’re just casually listening.
i too wish that dan had straight up said exactly why frank is so critical of masculinity and *why* the motif of duality is so present in his music … but i also get why he didn’t. this song is one of franks most explicit in terms of addressing a male love interest (i mean it literally has a line that’s like “good dick could roll the eyes back in the skull”) and i just think dans not in a place where he would outright say “i love frank bc he talks poetically about gender roles and bisexuality” bc,,, naturally everyone would use that to pigeonhole exactly why dan loves and relates to frank’s music so much and, more fuckin importantly to me at least, much like moonlight–it runs the risk of this fan base completely overlooking the value of a man of color discussing his queerness in favor of thinking about *dan* relating to that queerness. i feel like the way dan talks about franks music is to protect himself but also to respect that franks music is so much bigger than he is and deserves to be listened to and evaluated completely on its own merits, for its own radicalism and beauty. so although i would love to hear dan go deeper with his reviews, bc i like dan and enjoy hearing his thoughts, i’m also happy he lets the music speak for itself and doesn’t run the risk of his reaction overshadowing everything that makes frank so courageous, artistic, and beautiful.