Where My Girls At?

I've been working on a list of female classical music critics, inspired by Steve Smith's Times piece on women composers. I'm halfway through my press list and have only found four. OK then.

I need to start on the women dance critic, theatre critic, and -- though they will most certainly make me cringe -- performing arts publicist numbers as well.

It's not just the blogosphere, either. In my ethnography of new music groups, I've found than women are very underrepresented. Their sexuality is also occasionally exploited. Check out this pic of Alarm Will Sound (http://alarmwillsound.com/images/hi-res/AWSgroup2007.jpg), where all the women are wearing dresses (b/c that's what they wear) except for Jackie Leclair who's seated with legs together, so no threat there. Several members have are emitting flames in various ways, but none of them are women (that pyrotechnic keyboard belongs to John Orfe.

Not convinced? Take a look at this picture (http://www.eighthblackbird.com/images/stories/20078bb1.jpg) of eighth blackbird. Is Lisa giving a lap dance? I especially like the exposed bellybutton.

i'm just riffing on the spot here, which means i have nothing to support these ideas, which will be presented in their rough, polemic, unbalanced forms:

could it be that even though there are more women in classical music now than ever before that we're still being encouraged, both overtly and covertly, to be conservative -- that is, to carry on and uphold the tradition of classical music, not through innovation or creation (something women are allowed to be as baby-makers, but not so much in other roles), but through strict adherence to established norms? do women not get involved in new music groups as much because they think it'll be too rebellious and that will come back to bite them in the arse?

do men ever find it oppressive to have to be the ones to act out and rebel all the time? and when men do rebel, why is it always perceived as 'boys will be boys,' but when girls do rebel, it's just a gimmick or they're feminazis or some other negative connotation?

how much did the women get involved in their representation of themselves in these photos? i'm guessing the woman in eighth blackbird had more of a say, 'cause it's a smaller group. she looks like she's genuinely having a good time (even though it is a little weird that it does look a lot like she's dancing for a small gang of clearly happy men). but at least she's up front and happy. it's a bit sexualized, but in an empowering way; it looks like it's her choice, her idea. whereas the women in the AWS photo are completely desexualized and that's not actually better than being sexualized. the next question is, how much do these photos represent the reality of playing music in these groups?

Well, Alarm Will Sound certainly has a lot of fun in rehearsals and so does eighth blackbird. I think that the question here is of presentation. It seems to me, a man, that women in new music groups are generally much more preoccupied with the ideas of attractiveness, clothing, and of their physical appearance than men. I think this is true of the classical music culture at large, though obviously you could find examples of a particular man who spends more energy on appearance than a particular woman.

As far as why women get involved in new music, I really cannot say how gender issues manifest. Most people express a desire to play interesting, difficult and different music than the older classical music they have been taught to play. They also often relate to new music more strongly than they do to older music.

I think that these photos certainly represent an attempt to break with norms. My main concern in regards to the 8bb photo centers on the fact that a woman is the source of sexual energy.

that women in new music groups are generally much more preoccupied with the ideas of attractiveness, clothing, and of their physical appearance than men.

wow. *picks jaw up off the floor* that hasn't been my experience at all. in Anti-Social Music, it's always been 'wear what you want except concert black' and the only girl ever really that concerned with her appearance was pink weitzman, who didn't want to change out of her Santa-Con get-up. it's a complete non-issue in both ASM and the other new music group i've been playing with more frequently, thingNY. the one group where we do talk a lot about appearance is Mohair Timewarp and that is driven entirely by Bill Brittelle, because it's all part of the concept. i don't know, john -- maybe you're hanging out with the wrong girls.

oh wait, i thought of one ASM incident: when we premiered my piece for jug and two saws, we three gals decided to dress extra, extra pretty and fancy, to contrast the folksy nature of the instruments we were playing (i even wore pink!).

is it a problem when a woman is the source of sexual energy? really? the whole thing can be such a can of worms, which is why i actually have a problem with the AWS photo, because it seems they're trying so hard to avoid the issue. there's such a lack of sexual energy from the women that they seem disenfranchised, unplugged -- boring. only the guys get to do cool stuff like play with fire. if the girls could get in on the fire action, that would be sexy without being creepy. it would make it seem a lot less like a boys' club and more like a bad-ass circus where everybody does cool tricks. i feel that's the message they want to send with the whole fire thing, but too many people (boys and girls) look too stiff. the 8bb photo walks the sexual line more, and for me, that's more intriguing. yes, women are way too often exploited as sex objects, but to me, there's a playful element here that keeps it from being creepy. yes, women want it both ways: we want to be able to express our sexual selves without being scolded for it or taken unfair advantage of. that's very tough to express in a picture; 8bb comes pretty close.

To be honest, the women I personally know in these creative fields - be they dancers, visual artists, or musicians - all find "blogs" tiresome, petulant, and even unhealthy emotionally and professionally. I know "blogs" are supposed to bring us all together into one big happy creative community - but they often do just the opposite.

And isn't privacy - our inner life if you well - a precious thing? Does EVERYTHING have to go up on the Internet?

So maybe (I'm generalizing here...) women are a little more mature than men (I include myself in that category...) and don't feel this need to post their life stories and daily opinions in a public forum..?

Andrea, I'm really glad to hear that you disagree. It suggests a more equal opportunity community than what I had experienced. I should also clarify my earlier statement. I have a problem with a woman being the exclusive source of sexual energy. The idea that sex must/should be a feminine quality as opposed to a masculine characteristic poses problems, not the idea that women are sexual. But maybe the men in the picture have a sexuality that I'm missing. What do you think?

You make an excellent point about the AWS photo and I completely agree. Could I contact you sometime about my project?

Hey Molly, I can't get enough of Why Are We building Such a Big Ship?, so thanks for mentioning them.

Molly adds: So glad you're enjoying the band! And the feedback here is great. Honestly, John, when you first commented, I thought you were poking fun at me for being too sensitive, so this has been very perceptually enlightening. And I love Andrea's boil-down of the 8bb photo and empowered sexualization. It was spot on for me considering a lot of this post started as a reaction to the film Wanted which turned out to be 1) horrible!! (in not the fun way I was expecting), but also 2) a terrifyingly adolescent sex fantasy of power/violence/womanhood as projected across the body of Angelina Jolie. Not the beacon of super attractive female strength and wit that I arrived expecting to see. (I know, I know, why would I expect that? I was blinded by hope, I guess.)

I don't want this to turn into anything like the last thread, by my two cents on a couple of the issues:

-if anyone perceives women as more concerned with appearance than men, which in classical music I really haven't found, it's because of society's pressure and years and years of advertising and media damaging people's personal body image and enforcing gender roles.

-I've been thinking a lot recently about the masculinity of complex new music, of jazz, of metal, classic rock, and of politics, and about this trend's possible correlation with male sexual performance and competition...it seems that men often resort to genres like new complexity or metal because of their own social pressures to "be a man" and (knowingly or unknowingly or indifferently) muscling women out of the picture (maybe the 'boys will be boys' kind of thing mentioned above by Andrea) or turning women off/away. I have plenty of friends who've had this kind of experience in bands of mostly men. But it's important to acknowledge the (very different) social pressures that men have to combat as well, though I don't think they're on the same level as those of women.

Yes, women still have to navigate the double-consciousness (great Liz Phair article, by the way). This is a large can of worms, but in light of the recent criticism that Hilary tried to assume the role of a male politician instead of embrace her femininity and therefore didn't use her sex to her advantage or challenge the highly masculine arena of the US executive branch, I think this idea can apply to the music world. It must be a very, very difficult thing for a woman to feel comfortable in, say, the "new music" scene, because of its reinforced history of masculinity and centuries of aesthetics and ideologies constructed by men, or to know how best to present herself. All the options have their caveats: a) women can try to assimilate and uphold the status quo, perhaps in this Hilary-esque manner, and receive the same criticisms that Hilary has; b) they can use their sexual distinctions from men and present themselves in the way of the 8bb photo--which I don't have a problem with hypothetically--but you have to ask: who is the intended audience of that photo? Doesn't it seem like this intended audience is a bunch of men, and therefore the photo is just catering towards the masculine tradition?
c) they can oversexualize themselves, in the manner of Christina Aguilera or someone--which, again, I have no problem with hypothetically, but then I think about who's probably managing her production, her label, her business, and imagine (though don't know) that in her case and many others, she's probably being manufactured by men and a male aesthetic. And regardless of who's making the calls, they're liable to receive criticism for being too sexual. Even within these few comments we have criticism for being too sexual and for being asexual...so what defines the happy medium?
d) they can say the hell with all of this and do their best to transcend the issues (which is what I think Andrea's groups may do), but they could receive criticism for not actively campaigning against the still prevalent masculine features of the scene in general e) they could reincarnate as Angelina Jolie in Wanted (that Molly linked to) and kick dudes' asses and be sexy as hell--play both games, I guess (but again, watching the trailer, I'm asking who the intended audience is...probably young to middle-aged men). The Liz Phair article states the current ideal woman is "some combination of ingénue mom, Indy 500 racer and Girl Gone Wild" and I don't think that's far off.

-Chris, I think if you've found that women you know don't like blogging, besides the element of chance, I'm guessing it's because of the same reasons above - history has taken its toll and there still aren't as many female bloggers than men, just like there weren't (or aren't) as many female art critics as male in print media, and it's not easy to enter a male-dominated paradigm. I can't imagine it has anything to do with maturity, or agree that blogging is immature, or that either sex is inherently more mature than the other.

-So Molly, as one of those light-skinned XY's, I'm with you! But how do we carry on in this world and try to make some headway? I think peeps like me need to advocate for female musicians and writers as much as we can, but that's not enough. There's a lot more broader social change that needs to happen and hopefully trickle down, but I think there's a lot more that bloggers and musicians can do in the meantime.

-By the way, I think I've eaten yogurt for breakfast for the past four or five days.

Molly adds: Thanks for the wide-ranging response, Alex. Lots of great material in here to think on. As for me and the question of where next, I have to cop out in a sense and say that's what I'm working on, too. Anne Midgette's recent WaPo appointment was a huge role-model-flag-waving for me, but I am only now, at 30, coming up against overt sexism personally. I don't know if it's because I've never challenged anyone in this way before, or because I've just been lucky. I think there's a lot to be said for not getting bored with the topic. We need to rehash the tragedies and offer props to the beacons of progress till we truly get where we need to be.

oh my, i saw "wanted," too! (my partner wanted to engaged in mindless summer 'fun' after a rough year of teaching; i was totally dragged to the theater against my will...for the sake of saving our relationship. hee hee.) i didn't even really think that much about the "terrifyingly adolescent sex fantasy of power/violence/womanhood as projected across the body of Angelina Jolie," because i was more distracted by the strange attempt at promoting action + focused attention + sense of purpose = higher levels of consciousness which we can only sell through violence and an avenging-someone's-death plotline (which was such a stretch). it was a 5th rate "the matrix" and i hated that, too, for exactly the same reasons.

chris, i have to say i agree with your female friends' assessment of blogs. it's a real conflict for me. i am torn between not engaging in tiresome petulancy and simply not representing. i have something of a need to represent, because i read some comments in the blogosphere and i think, "someone has to show that this is not the only way to think about this." and then i get sucked in and it's just terrible. like right now. as it says in that liz phair article: In situations where equality is assumed but men still dominate, women occupy a strange space between the center and the margins. They can express opinions, but they're not dictating the terms of the conversation. i'm working on dictating the terms. yes, you can call me bossy. and then i'll go back to working on my dissertation, i promise.

but i'm not sure the phenomenon of blog-avoiding-women is just chance as monsieur bacon surmises (there's a title for you: "women who avoid blogs and the men who love them..."). i, too, find that a lot of women don't like talking shop and they don't like sparring-style conversation to arrive at some sort of epiphany (this is a hard point to reach, but i do think it is the goal of verbal sparring, even for guys, and not always just a puffing up of feathers to make oneself look bigger). and this is another conflict of mine. i like talking shop, to a point -- perhaps a point further than most women. but then, i get sick of guys who go on and on and on about shop. it's a balance thing. like most people, though, i tend to find and surround myself with the kind of people i like, so i have found girls who do talk shop and will spar with other girls and other guys (and no, they're not all dykes, ha ha).

But maybe the men in the picture have a sexuality that I'm missing. What do you think?
Well, then you have to think about what makes men attractive -- and guys, you don't have to be queer to do this and doing it doesn't make you queer, you just have to think about what makes you feel like you are projecting sexiness. back to the bad-ass circus idea, i think that's sexy in and of itself -- there's power, there's exoticism, there's magic. so that's there in the AWS photo. genuine smiles are always, always sexy. it seems people think that sexy has to be serious and intense all the time, but that's just one flavor. so once again, the 8bb photo wins out, because everyone is smiling real smiles. oh, except the guy on the left in the red shirt; he's not sexy. i'm not kidding, here -- if someone had poked him in the ribs right at the camera click, his sexy points would shoot right up (oh... that's not a good analogy, is it... sorry). even the guy with the beard is smiling with his eyes. it makes a world of difference. but back to the AWS photo: i happen to know caleb -- this is a totally unsexy picture of him. his personality doesn't come across whatsoever. personality is sexy. that's what you want to see in a photo and hear in the music. it's got to match up. now, i am certainly not going to claim that ASM's photo is better, because it's not (clicking on my name will bring you to that site, then you can nose around in 'press'), no offense to the fine photographer we had. it's hard to come up with a great photo of a large group of people, which i think contributes to the difference between the AWS and 8bb photos.

john, you can contact me about your project as you see fit: andrea at reloadsanear dot com.

cheers.

I'd like to say I've always looked forward to reading what Molly and Andrea have to say via this medium. And I too feel a similar need to represent my corner of NYC (although none of my collaborators really read my blogging to be honest!).

Sidebar: I'm a big fan of Matana Roberts' Shadows of a People blog. Please check her out.

And Andrea, I'm glad you sort of confirm what may be a general attitude among women in the arts with regards to blogs. I just want to get that stuff out there among the people I respect.

Mr. Bacon - I will have to read your post later - but at the risk of sounding wimpy I don't disagree with what you said regarding my comment.