That's not what the quote says at all. It's saying we accept Vonnegut's vulgarity because his work is considered "high art," not that we only read him because he's white. The claim is that studying certain hip-hop is valuable in spite of its vulgarity, and that the reason we find it hard to overlook the vulgarity is that its considered somehow baser than the writing of (a notably white) Vonnegut. We study art because it's beautiful, profound, or otherwise "good." We should not overlook art just because it's vulgar, whether you're talking about Vonnegut or Kendrick. Did you read the whole post?
I did read the whole post. You don't have to be disrespectful to make your point. The lady outright says that we accept Vonnegut despite his use of the word fuck because he is white. I'm saying that we accept him because he is a good writer and that we should study high art like you said. And besides, even if he is white and is accepted as part of the literary canon, his book is commonly banned from schools specifically because of the use of the word fuck and its sexual situations.
Didn't intend disrespect; I was genuinely curious. If I wanted to be snarky, it'd be much clearer than that. I would need to get almost meaninglessly technical to refute the rest of your argument, so whatever. The long and short is that the two sentences in your second paragraph aren't contradictory. PS Not a ladyI did read the whole post. You don't have to be disrespectful to make your point.