Whatever the 1992 Los Angeles rebellion may ultimately mean in the annals of United States history, for a moment at least, it seemed to find an important niche in US popular culture. Five months after the fires, the Los Angeles Times reported that the “riots” had become television' “new theme” in the 1992–93 season. Shows as diverse as Fresh Prince of Bel Air, Knots Landing, A Different World and Doogie Howser featured episodes devoted to the rebellion.

From a “war of maneuver” perspective it looked as though the rebellion was headed the way of the Malcolm X moniker – toward cultural appropriation (cf. Foster 1985; Featherstone 1991). The rebellion, it seemed, had been reduced to a cultural product for sale to a consuming public, an icon of resistance that was being commodified and defused by the system. From around-the-clock news coverage to situation comedies, the societal differences laid bare by the rebellion were being appropriated for “fresh” television narratives. In short, it appeared as though the hegemonic order had expanded to the point where any oppositional meanings expressed through the rebellion would be safely contained.

But when conditions are right, people do take stands against cultural appropriation and containment. The group interviews conducted for this study coincided with this period of containment. Nonetheless, the personal experience, intertextual memories and raced subjectivity of many informants seemed to counterbalance the forces of incorporation. As sources of resistance, informant ways of seeing safeguarded certain heartfelt meanings associated with the rebellion, while challenging other more hegemonic ones.