Atlantis Vol. 14 No. 2
Spring! printemps 1989
Towards a Feminist
Analysis of
"Women in Rock
Music":
Patti Smith's "Gloria"
Kimberly Anne Sawchuck
ABSTRACT
Within contemporary social theory, there is a developing literature which analyzes the position of women within various cultural practices such as
literature, film, and the visual arts, and the beginnings of a critical cultural analysis of rock music. However, there are very few discussions of the
position of women within the rock music industry. The goal of this article is to attempt to articulate one way feminists can understand rock music,
women's participation in the genre, and the relationship of this cultural practice to the ideological production of gender. This paper is divided into two
sections. First, I examine how even a critical feminist content analysis forecloses interrogations of "entertainment industries" or popular culture
because of its uncritical assumption of a referential theory of language. To demonstrate this, I analyze one of the few articles on women in rock music:
Deborah Harding and Emily Nett's "Women in Rock Music," which appeared in Atlantis in 1984.1 conclude with a reading of Patti Smith's version of
the rock and roll classic "Gloria" to emphasize the need for more detailed analyses of the subject positions assigned to women within rock music lyrics
using feminist deconstructive and psychoanalytic theories of subjectivity. Contrary to Harding and Nett's position, "Gloria" demonstrates that it is
possible for women to participate in rock music without acting as "male-identified women."
RESUME
Dans les theories contemporaines sur la societe et la culture, il existe un nombre croissant d'articles qui analysent la position des femmes dans la
litterature, le cinema, et les arts visuels. Peu a peu, on commence aussi a voir des articles critiques sur la musique rock. Cependant, il existe tres peu
d'articles qui etudient la position des femmes dans le rock and roll. Cet article se propose done d'examiner la participation des femmes dans l'industrie
du rock and roll, et la notion du genre de cette musique. Je me penche d'abord sur la position de Harding et Nett, exprimee dans leur article "Women
and Rock Music," (qui parut dans la revue Atlantis en 1984) qui suggere que la participation des femmes dans cette industrie est impossible, puisque le
rock and roll est du genre masculin. Ensuite, jediscute la re-ecriturede la chanson "Gloria" par Patti Smith, afin de montrer les possibilites qu'ont les
femmes deredefinirle genre. J'utilise des theories contemporaines depsychanalyse, dedeconstructionetdefeminisme afin d'aborder cette question. En
effet, malgre la position de Harding et Nett, j'avance que la chanson "Gloria" arrive a montrer aux femmes les possibilites qu'elles ont de participer
dans la musique rock, sans qu'elles aient besoin d'agir, pour autant, comme des "femmes deiinies par les hommes."
Part I—The Limitations of Content Analysis: A Critique
geneous p h e n o m e n a i n t o a single term. T h e existence of
this term is then e x p l a i n e d by a single cause so that the
of Harding and Nett
m u l t i p l e meanings of the term, as w e l l as the h i s t o r i c a l
p r o d u c t i o n of its significations are believed to be resolved
The trap of representational coherence
under the same s i g n . T h e terms, w h i c h I have b o r r o w e d
A l t h o u g h the title of this paper is " T o w a r d s a F e m i n i s t
f r o m H a r d i n g a n d Nett's title, but w h i c h need deconstruc-
A n a l y s i s of ' W o m e n i n R o c k M u s i c ' : P a t t i S m i t h ' s ' G l o -
t i o n are " w o m e n " a n d " r o c k m u s i c " : and the single cause
r i a ' , " I w o u l d l i k e to b e g i n my analysis by deconstructing
w h i c h e x p l a i n s both of these terms i n their article is
the title " W o m e n i n R o c k M u s i c " because its use of terms
sexism.
is p a r a d i g m a t i c of the view of language i m p l i c i t i n a
s o c i o l o g i c a l content analysis. T h i s view of language suc-
W h i l e sexism exists, a n d is one of the conditions w h i c h
cumbs to w h a t Teresa de L a u r e t i s calls the " t r a p of repre-
e x p l a i n s the present s i t u a t i o n of b o t h w o m e n a n d rock
1
sentational coherence" a n d it weakens H a r d i n g a n d Nett's
m u s i c , we must be certain that o u r analysis is not m a k i n g
f e m i n i s t analysis of w o m e n ' s p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n , o r absence
a h i s t o r i c a l l y p r o d u c e d c o n d i t i o n i n t o a metaphysical or
f r o m rock m u s i c a n d the r o c k m u s i c i n d u s t r y . B y the
o n t o l o g i c a l necessity. T h u s , a l t h o u g h the i n t e n t i o n of this
" t r a p of representational coherence," I mean o u r p r o p e n -
article is to understand the ways w o m e n participate i n or
sity, as academic critics, to collapse distinct a n d hetero-
are p r o h i b i t e d f r o m p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n rock m u s i c because of
2
patriarchy, I a m not interested i n uncovering a specifically
female jouissance o r f e m i n i n i t y — that is, a type of femin i n e pleasure that is specifically inherent to w o m e n perse
— as a n alternative strategy. Rather, I want to analyze the
"technologies of gender," such as rock music, w h i c h reproduce both men a n d w o m e n as gendered subjects w i t h
specific behaviours a n d pleasures appropriate to each
gender.
5
I n other words, I a m interested i n the social construction
of o u r natural self-understanding of our sexuality; a social
construction of sexuality w h i c h is constantly reproduced
for subjects i n s i g n i f y i n g practices, such as rock and r o l l .
T h i s naturalization hides what is essentially the process of
semiosis; that is, w h e n the processes w i t h i n culture produce attributes o r meanings to both signs and subjectivities. T h e question that I pose as a feminist is h o w c a n
w o m e n articulate sexual desire/pleasure w i t h i n symbolic
systems such as rock music, that encourage active sexual
desire/pleasure for men, w h i l e women's sexuality is normalised as passive, subservient, non-existent, or i n s i g n i f i cant? W h a t interventionist possibilities exist for w o m e n
w r i t i n g w i t h i n traditional male genres?
4
Deconstructing " W o m e n "
A n a l y z i n g rock m u s i c as a possible zone of intervention
for w o m e n provides a challenge for feminist theory
because of rock's reputation as " a frenzied celebration of
masculine potency." A c c o r d i n g to H a r d i n g and Nett, the
lyrics of 40 songs bear this out. T h e y conclude that rock
music is inherently sexist for several reasons: its origins as
a male w o r k i n g class challenge to the established symbolic
order; the u n e q u a l d i s t r i b u t i o n of the sexes w i t h i n the
industry; the predominance of male listeners a n d consumers; the dearth of w o m e n performers w i t h i n the genre;
a n d f i n a l l y , because the lyrics a n d the a l b u m covers depict
w o m e n i n purely b i o l o g i c a l roles as submissive n u r t u r i n g
mothers or submissive n u r t u r i n g playmates. H a r d i n g and
Nett argue that these d u a l images themselves have two
aspects to them, w h i c h reflect men's ambivalences towards
w o m e n , depending o n what needs they need satisfied; the
n u r t u r i n g mother can be sexually uninteresting, demandi n g , a n d enslaving; the sexually e x c i t i n g w o m a n can also
be a dangerous castrating bitch. Because " m u s i c is a direct
expression of ideas," rock music, as a manifestation of this
behaviour, provides a " w e a l t h of i n f o r m a t i o n " about the
d o m i n a t i o n of men a n d the s u b o r d i n a t i o n of w o m e n i n
our culture. T h u s , it is argued, rock music is important to
study, but it is not a conducive genre for w o m e n to express
their needs, desires, o r experiences.
5
6
T h i s last objection is the p r i m a r y focus of H a r d i n g a n d
Nett's analysis. It is also the most flawed: not perhaps i n
terms of its c o n c l u s i o n that there are p r i m a r i l y t w o images
of w o m e n c i r c u l a t i n g i n o u r culture, but i n terms of its
method, a n d the p o l i t i c a l message i m p l i e d by this method.
W h i l e I agree w i t h H a r d i n g and Nett that w o m e n a n d
m e n are portrayed differently a n d u n e q u a l l y w i t h i n
images — generally, m e n are represented as the active
subjects, w h i l e w o m e n are represented as passive objects
— I disagree w i t h their view of h o w this process occurs. I n
fact, they do not really ask this question, t a k i n g instead the
differences a n d the dichotomy between men a n d w o m e n as
self-evident. H a r d i n g and Nett's analysis goes awry because
it lapses i n t o a n o t i o n of these subject positions as essential
or n a t u r a l behaviours for each sex. T h e i r concept of
gender identity is simplistic, a n d unconsciously reduces
m a n a n d w o m a n to b i o l o g i c a l categories, p r i o r to their
p o s i t i o n i n g w i t h i n c u l t u r a l , l i n g u i s t i c or economic practices. T h i s is a n important p o i n t to consider w h e n c o n t e m p l a t i n g the possibility of a specifically female, feminine, or feminist culture, a n d warrants a close examination
of their article.
A s H a r d i n g a n d Nett note, it is precisely the l i m i t e d
view of w o m e n as biological beings that contributes to
sexism: " M a l e - i d e n t i f i e d w o m e n are always defined a n d
understood w i t h i n their biological capacities, either of
reproduction or sexual arousal a n d g r a t i f i c a t i o n . " H o w ever, w i t h i n their analysis, sex a n d gender, as w e l l as sex
a n d sexism, are c o n t i n u a l l y equated so that the b i o l o g i c a l ,
sociological a n d psychological are collapsed i n t o single
terms. These are treated as analogous, w h e n i n fact, they
are not. T h i s is belied i n such sentences as "...men define
the female as they define everything else" a n d "patriarchal socialization has deprived them of a feminine c o n sciousness." W h i l e sex a n d gender are n o t completely
separable, it is curious that " m e n , " a social category,
define "the female," a b i o l o g i c a l category. Surely more
attention w o u l d be p a i d to this distinction if the issue of
sexuality a n d the process of engendering h a d been more
clearly articulated. Surely the consciousness to be striven
for is a ieminist consciousness, a p o l i t i c a l a n d social consciousness of woman's p o s i t i o n i n patriarchal culture, not
a f e m i n i n e consciousness. W i t h o u t more precise termin o l o g y , M a r i b e l M o r g a n or P h y l l i s Schafly m i g h t be said
to be representatives of a feminine consciousness, because
they have a clear n o t i o n of what " t h e f e m i n i n e " is a n d
s h o u l d be, i n relation to " m a s c u l i n e " behaviour: o r a
female singer, such as Sheena Easton m i g h t be said to have
a feminine consciousness because she sits at h o m e h a p p i l y
a w a i t i n g her m a n w h o works a l l day. W h i l e I a m sure this
is not what H a r d i n g and Nett desire, for they criticize the
7
8
9
female singers of Heart i n this way, the question remains:
if w o m e n can act i n male identified ways, then what is a
" f e m i n i n e , " or more i m p o r t a n t l y , a teminist consciousness?
cize rock for r e m o v i n g w o m e n f r o m the practices of everyday life: " T h e exotic, w i s h f u l fantasy surroundings a n d
n u d i t y or dramatic c l o t h i n g removes the w o m a n i n the
pictures for rock m u s i c records f r o m the everyday w o r l d of
w o r k i n the home i n w h i c h real w o m e n m o v e . " I n other
words, they w a n t a more realistic portrayal of the lives of
everyday w o m e n , w h i l e r e t a i n i n g the power to decide
w h i c h experiences are real for w o m e n a n d w h i c h are not:
aesthetic realism is thus condemned a n d advocated w i t h i n
the same article.
13
W i t h i n H a r d i n g a n d Nett's article, w o m a n or the femin i n e , is i n danger of b e c o m i n g a reified term equivalent to
a l l that is victimized; this becomes most clear i n their
c o n c l u s i o n that feminist musicologists s h o u l d investigate
"the belittled role of w o m e n i n the development of
w o m a n - d e f i n e d styles of m u s i c a n d the takeover by d o m i nant m e n . . . " T h u s , their language, w h i c h is meant to be
descriptive, c o n t i n u a l l y , u n w i t t i n g l y and conservatively
ontologizes w o m a n as the belittled object of male d e f i n i tions. T h e value of the terms is s i m p l y reversed, so that
w o m a n becomes the positive term, w h i l e m a n becomes the
negative, w i t h o u t q u e s t i o n i n g the u n i f i e d coherence of
male a n d female sexuality i m p l i e d by this p o l a r o p p o s i t i o n i n g o r its hierarchical structure of value.
10
T h i s type of e m p i r i c a l sociological study is concerned
w i t h being realistic or representative. However, it does not
interrogate the n o t i o n of representation, w h i c h is problematic, a n d even w i t h i n the accepted sociological quantitative standards of representation, H a r d i n g a n d Nett's analysis falls s h o r t . " For example, i n their analysis of rock
a l b u m covers, they e x p l i c i t l y disregard a l b u m covers i n
w h i c h "the representation was of a band member or lead
singer portrayed as herself." T h i s biases their s a m p l i n g
towards those images w h i c h have a metaphorical d i m e n s i o n , w h i c h they then criticize as objectionable because
they are not realistic. A s w e l l , i n order to make the c l a i m
that rock a n d r o l l depicts w o m e n exclusively i n b i o l o g i c a l
o r sexual roles, it w o u l d have been useful to compare these
images w i t h the depiction of men to strengthen their
argument; for, if they admit that "there is n o doubt that
rock music is erotic m u s i c , " then it is obvious that w h e n
w o m e n are portrayed, they w i l l be portrayed s e x u a l l y .
T h e question is, h o w are the sexes portrayed i n a n intertexual relationship to each other that assigns a fixed,
u n i f i e d a n d differential value to each sex?
15
H a r d i n g a n d Nett develop the equation of " w o m a n as
v i c t i m " by decontextualising lyrics from the songs i n
order to make the data c o n f o r m to their thesis. T h i s is a
c r u c i a l p o i n t i n o u r discussion of h o w feminist sociological content analysis approaches culture a n d language, as
o p p o s e d to a n analysis of language a n d culture f r o m a
critical feminist semiotic or discursive p o i n t of view.
H a r d i n g a n d Nett are so eager to prove that " T h e o n l y
sense that can be made of the representations of w o m e n
f o u n d i n this m u s i c w h i c h is created by a n d distributed by
men for men's taste a n d c o n s u m p t i o n is i n terms of the
sexual a n d sexist fantasies so blatant i n its l y r i c s " that they
ignore o r distort a l l evidence to the contrary. T h u s , they
completely miss the critical moment i n R o u g h Trade's
" P h y s i c a l V i o l e n c e . " In fact, their paraphrasing reverses
the m e a n i n g of the lyrics to insinuate that Carole Pope of
R o u g h T r a d e has internalized the " v i c t i m m e n t a l i t y . " I
quote f r o m H a r d i n g a n d Nett: " T h e v i c t i m theme is also
f o u n d a m o n g the female singers...she describes his hands
o n her throat, her face t u r n i n g red, a n d feeling l i k e a
p u n c h i n g b a g . " T h e o r i g i n a l lyrics are: " I can feel y o u r
h a n d o n my throat. Face t u r n i n g red. I a m not y o u r
p u n c h i n g b a g . " P a r a p h r a s i n g one line of a song decontextualizes a n d distorts the lyrics, whose m e a n i n g is never
f u l l y e x p l a i n e d i n one l i n e , but must be analyzed i n relat i o n to the rest of the tune. W i t h i n these lyrics, violence is
" r a m p a n t , " but it is not advocated — it is b r o u g h t to the
surface as a n u n w a n t e d part of m a n y sexual relations.
T h u s , w h i l e o n the one h a n d , they criticize the d e p i c t i o n
of violence, a s s u m i n g that its depiction encourages violent practices, o n the other h a n d , H a r d i n g a n d Nett criti11
12
16
T h i s typical content analysis misunderstands m u c h of
rock music, even the musical mainstream, because it treats
language as literal, rather than h a v i n g a poetic, metaphorical or connotative potential. T h u s , the use of a n i m a l
metaphors for w o m e n is condemned because it implies
that men t h i n k we are s u b h u m a n , a n d "because they are
not quite h u m a n , they must be controlled a n d dominated
by m e n , not o n l y for male benefit, but for her o w n g o o d . "
T h e p r o b l e m is not that a n i m a l metaphors are used, but
that they c o n t i n u a l l y inscribe w o m e n as "the h u n t e d , "
w h i l e men are portrayed as "the h u n t e r " — it lies i n the
relation of metaphors to each other, rather than i n the use
of metaphors. T h e p r o b l e m w i t h this stereotyping is not
that it is distorted or distorting, but that it c o n t i n u a l l y
anchors practices a n d meanings as the absolute meaning,
rather than as a process of semiosis.
17
T h u s H a r d i n g a n d Nett decontextualize i n order to
criticise a n d believe that language can be f u l l y representa-
tional a n d w i t h o u t metaphors. T h i s p o s i t i o n o n language
leads to a critique of patriarchal d o m i n a t i o n based o n a
problematic set of assumptions about sexuality. A critique
of sexism reverts i n t o a critique of sex through a specious
c h a i n of reasoning. R o c k and r o l l , it is said, is bad because
it excludes w o m e n a n d because it proselytizes derogatory
a n d violent images of w o m e n . R o c k preaches that sex is
f u n o n l y if it is i l l i c i t . Sex is used to sell rock, a n d w o m e n
are what is being sold. T h e y insinuate that it is n o c o i n c i dence that rock a n d roll's rise occurred after the proliferation of pornography. Furthermore the presence of p o r n o g raphy i n o u r culture proves that bourgeois sensibilities
have been t h r o w n off. T h u s , rock's image as a challenge to
bourgeois c u l t u r a l norms cannot be sustained.
18
However, p r i v i l e g i n g sexual activity that is for procreation but not pleasure is still a part of our sexist culture so
that many forms of sexual behaviour, such as lesbianism,
sodomy, bisexuality, transvestism, are considered i l l i c i t .
Bourgeois sensibilities have not been cast away; i n fact, I
w o u l d argue that pornography is symptomatic of a bourgeois culture where everything, i n c l u d i n g sexuality, is a
potential c o m m o d i t y . F i n a l l y , what is a completely realistic or transparent portrayal of women? Is the objection to
fantasy? F o r H a r d i n g a n d Nett's analysis potentially bars
w o m e n f r o m expressing sexual desire or lust i n a n y t h i n g
but rigidly realistic terms. T h e y even e x p l a i n away the
success of w o m e n i n " a s e x u a l " folk music as a sign of
women's inability to express themselves sexually w i t h i n
patriarchy: " i t is harder for a w o m a n than a m a n to
portray her sexuality i n a way that contributes positively
to her i m a g e . . . " W h i l e I agree that w i t h i n patriarchy,
women's sexuality is always i n danger of being coopted,
they fail to recognize that w o m e n have portrayed their
sexuality i n ways that are not male-defined; thus, particip a t i o n or the sexual expression of female sexuality is
i m p l i c i t l y discouraged — i n their eagerness to portray
w o m e n as the victims of men, sex and sexism become more
and more synonymous throughout the article. I n the end
we are left i n a w o r l d w i t h o u t sex, the " r e a l " w o r l d — the
w o r l d of the home, w h i c h has not been a p a r t i c u l a r l y
liberating space for w o m e n .
19
T h i s brings us to the p r o b l e m of a n analysis w h i c h
attempts to analyze sexism or judge images i n terms of
their positive or negative images of w o m e n . W h i l e H a r d i n g a n d Nett admit that male-defined images of w o m e n
are ambivalent, their n o t i o n of ambivalence and the instab i l i t y of these meanings does not go far enough: they
s i m p l y lapse into simplistic dichotomies of two images,
each divided by two sides, both g o o d a n d bad. T o use
another example f r o m R o u g h Trade, the lyrics of the song
" H i g h School C o n f i d e n t i a l " are said to be sexist because
they stereotype w o m e n as being erotic a n d feared (she
makes his body twitch) a n d p o r t r a y i n g a sexual coldness
— two ambivalent images i n the song. H o w e v e r , as a n
example of sexism based o n their criteria of the maledefined w o m a n , this is problematic because of Carole
Pope's androgynous sexual image, as w e l l as her p u b l i c l y
lesbian p o s i t i o n . H a r d i n g a n d Nett's c o n t i n u a l interpretation of lyrics as sexist reveal their o w n heterosexist bias. Is
she s i n g i n g the song as a "male-defined w o m a n , " or a
lesbian w h o is both attracted a n d i n a d m i r a t i o n of female
teenage sexuality? T h e song does not have one clear interpretation, a n d far f r o m b e i n g an a m b i g u i t y that s h o u l d be
resolved, it is an a m b i g u i t y w h i c h gave the song p o p u l a r
commercial success, w h i l e c o n t a i n i n g a potentially subversive message about proper female sexual behaviour.
Images cannot be analyzed for their content, w h i c h can
be separated f r o m their context, but must be interpreted
semiotically, or i n relation to other systems a n d images of
meanings. In H a r d i n g a n d Nett's litany of single lines
f r o m rock lyrics, examples of sexism are u n a m b i g u o u s l y
portrayed. N o t o n l y does this produce specific distortions,
such as the above mentioned example of C a r o l e Pope, but
images never have a completely homogeneous content or
m e a n i n g w h i c h can be taken as given: they can be recontextualized to give them another meaning. A s Elizabeth
C o w i e states: "the image means not o n l y i n a n d of itself
but also connotes its place i n other discourses." T o give
another example of h o w this makes H a r d i n g a n d Nett's
interpretation of their data inadequate, consider their
interpretation of the " b a d " or "negative" image of w o m a n
a n d their c o n c l u s i o n that " . . . i n her place i n bed a w o m a n
is something to be feared." Rather than c o n c l u d i n g that
these male-defined lyrics may recognize either consciously
or unconsciously the power of female sexual difference,
H a r d i n g a n d Nett interpret a l l instances of representation
as sexist, a n d i n fact, reinscribe the n o t i o n of female sexuality as submissive. W e must be careful h o w we use the
terms " m a n " and " w o m a n , " for masculinity a n d f e m i n i n ity are not s i m p l y o p p o s i t i o n a l qualities or b i o l o g i c a l
attributes, but positions i n the symbolic practice of representation a n d self-representation. M e a n i n g is dependent
u p o n context, a n d it is precisely the context that is destroyed i n their content analysis.
20
21
Yet, as C o w i e warns, w h i l e the image does not enclose a
homogeneous meaning, neither is it permanently open;
readings remain i n the p r o d u c t i o n of the intertextuality,
as w e l l as the intratextuality of the image. W e can judge
images, but o n l y w i t h care, a n d i n a fashion that is sensitive to the historical contingency of this interpretation.
T h u s , there is neither a g i v e n u n i t y of m e a n i n g to enable
this, n o r a s i m p l e evaluative system for d e f i n i n g sexism;
n o r is there a reality separable f r o m language o r ideology,
completely free f r o m possible misuse for sexist ends. T o
give another example, a picture of a mother a n d c h i l d is
neither negative n o r positive. It can be understood as a
stereotype of a l l w o m e n as mothers (negative), or as depicti n g one aspect of a w o m a n ' s experience (positive). Alternative readings are not j u s t a question of new content, but
the result of a different strategy of p r o d u c t i o n of the image
i n relation to its intertextual space; this is precisely what
P a t t i S m i t h ' s r e n d i t i o n of " G l o r i a " does. A n a l y s i s such as
H a r d i n g a n d Nett's delegitimates their o w n legitimate
criticisms of performers such as S c o r p i o n , or T e d N u g e n t ,
by a s s u m i n g that a l l references to w o m e n or sexuality are
sexist.
Analyzing "Rock music"
T h i s brings me to m y second objection w i t h H a r d i n g
a n d Nett's other term—there is n o such t h i n g as rock and
r o l l per se; that is, rock m u s i c is not the u n i f o r m or
homogeneous m u s i c a l experience that academic critics
outside of the genre assume it to be. Critics such as H a r d i n g a n d Nett do not acknowledge distinctions i n the genre
w h i c h are i m p o r t a n t differences to listeners of rock and
r o l l ; there are significant differences w i t h i n rock's subdivisions, such as heavy metal, psychedelia, p u n k , cow p u n k ,
reggae, ska or r h y t h m a n d b l u e s — a n d each of these different rock traditions has a particular s i g n i f i c a t i o n i n different regions. A s M c R o b b i e a n d F r i t h p o i n t out, we cannot
d i s t i n g u i s h between the Stranglers a n d Souxie a n d the
Banshees, or i n this case, Carole P o p e of R o u g h T r a d e a n d
T e d N u g e n t , if we a p p r o a c h rock's ideological content as
just another c o m m o d i t y f o r m w i t h i n the patriarchal capitalist mass entertainment industry. I n fact, "the p r o b l e m
of a n a l y z i n g the particular ideological w o r k of a particular piece of m u s i c is avoided w i t h the assumption that a l l
commodities have the same effect." T h i s h o m o g e n i z i n g
effect seems i n t r i n s i c to the study of p o p u l a r culture
undertaken w i t h i n sociological analyses, such as those of
H a r d i n g a n d Nett. Furthermore, i n the case of H a r d i n g
a n d Nett, they borrow their d e f i n i t i o n of rock f r o m the
d e f i n i t i o n of the C R T C w i t h o u t analyzing that definition,
or s u p p l y i n g it to the reader.
22
R o c k music, l i k e other forms of entertainment or p o p u lar culture, suffers f r o m a n academic e l i t i s m that separates
h i g h culture or art f r o m mass culture or entertainment,
a n d sociological content analyses such as H a r d i n g a n d
Nett's share this e l i t i s m . U n l i k e literature or classical
music, the entertainment industry is not perceived as hav-
i n g any specific aesthetic qualities that make it w o r t h
analyzing i n any detailed fashion. It is treated as generalizable, the same, representationally coherent. U n i v e r s a l
claims, such as rock is "probably the most blatantly misogynistic a n d aggressive f o r m of music currently listened
to...," are then made based u p o n these absences of distinct i o n . By assuming that the h i g h turnover of songs i n the
industry means that we cannot learn h o w patriarchal
ideological effects w o r k o n consumer listeners i n particular songs, we do ignore a valuable source of i n f o r m a t i o n
about the transmission of patriarchal values—and women's
p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n rock becomes a homogenizing, ahistorical experience. There is n o one singular experience of
w o m e n w i t h i n rock music, there is not a u n i f o r m genre we
can c a l l " r o c k m u s i c . " T h e phrase " w o m e n i n r o c k " collapses both the terms " w o m e n " a n d "rock m u s i c " a n d
women's p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n rock music to one standard,
u n i f o r m category—regardless of the differences i n their
music, race, class, n a t i o n a l i t y , or time of their historical
participation i n the music industry.
23
W i t h i n H a r d i n g a n d Nett's analysis, this leads them to
dismiss w o m e n w h o participate i n the industry as w o m e n
whose socialization has deprived them of a feminine consciousness: either they are male-defined because they portray themselves as subservient to men or they front a l l male bands, or, it is even suggested, women's increased
participation may be a sign of the industry's decline.
Instead of celebrating women's resistance to patriarchal
definitions, or their participation as active subjects, w o m a n
becomes further inscribed as "object, the defined, the follower, the passive recipient to be used and a b u s e d . " T h e y
contradict themselves by p o i n t i n g out that Pat Benatar,
Deborah H a r r y , Carole Pope a n d M a r i a n n e F a i t h f u l l are
" p r o d u c i n g lyrics as sexual and i n t i m i d a t i n g l y aggressive
as any currently marketed by m e n , " and then c i t i n g these
same lyrics as sexist. T h u s , the use of these u n i f o r m
categories such as " w o m e n " and "rock m u s i c " i m p l y that
subjects are interpellated i n t o singular subject positions. I
w o u l d argue that they are themselves sexist because they
assume that a l l w o m e n are d o i n g essentially the same
t h i n g . " W o m e n ' s m u s i c , " like other large sociological
terms such as " b l a c k m u s i c " then becomes a vague and
nebulous undifferentiated other. T h u s the very methodo l o g i c a l structure, a n d epistemological presuppositions
w i t h i n this sociological content analysis guarantees, i n
advance, that what is transgressive, counterhegemonic, or
transformative w i l l be ignored, or i n this particular case,
cited as a sign of the industry's decline a n d eventual
downfall.
24
25
T h e f i n a l question asked is " w h a t d o w o m e n have to
g a i n i n entering into a stage that is largely the innovation
of a subculture of w o r k i n g class men, and is n o w part of
the culture industry of late c a p i t a l i s m ? " T h e answer of
course, has already been predetermined by the analysis
— n o t h i n g . W o m e n s h o u l d a v o i d rock m u s i c and stick to
woman-defined music a n d woman-defined styles.
26
W h i l e I do believe it is i m p o r t a n t that w o m e n struggle
for self-representation a n d that genres exist that are pred o m i n a n t l y female, contrary to H a r d i n g a n d Nett, I do not
believe that w o m e n can f i n d a genre that " a u t h e n t i c a l l y "
represents their desires a n d is specifically u n i q u e to
w o m e n . T h e idea of a n exclusively feminine genre that
can authentically represent the female voice is predicated
o n a conception of a female subject that does not challenge
the d o m i n a n t representation of w o m a n as a purely biological being, but i n fact reinscribes this b i o l o g i c a l representation w i t h i n the terms of its discourse; it depicts a feminine nature p r i o r to its socio-cultural p o s i t i o n i n g and it
draws a necessary causal relation between genre a n d
gender. A l t h o u g h e m p i r i c a l analysis can be used to document h o w the culture industry is c i r c u l a t i n g images at any
p o i n t i n time, it is even more important from a p o l i t i c a l
perspective not to assume that genres o r genders are fixed
i n t o such homogeneous, u n e q u i v o c a l , ontological categories; for what possibilities of intervention exist if a l l
intervention is automatically branded as some form of
cooptation?
In summary, it is m y contention that H a r d i n g a n d
Nett's analysis is riddled w i t h theoretical difficulties and
p o l i t i c a l traps for w o m e n . It presupposes that aesthetics
s h o u l d be realistic a n d that a l l images portrayed should
represent a reality; yet w h e n it is portrayed, they tend to
depict it as advocating this c o n d i t i o n . It assumes that there
is a natural female sexuality that male sexuality represses
essentializing a historical c o n d i t i o n i n t o a n ontological
position; men dominate and w i l l always dominate women,
thus they are the aggressors a n d we are the victims. It then
draws specious causal connections between musical styles
and this essentialized version of sexuality. It conceives of
a l l aspects of the m u s i c industry as exploitative, a n d subsequently analyzes a l l lyrics, a n d a l l p a r t i c i p a t i o n w i t h i n
the industry as some f o r m of false consciousness. F i n a l l y ,
because it draws a picture of the totality that is homogeneous, seamless a n d undifferentiated, the o n l y intervention
possible is one that can c l a i m to have a n entirely separate
and untainted o r i g i n outside of the present system a n d
history. It thereby places feminist theorists i n the position
of critics rather than as practitioners of a " c r i t i q u e " of
culture, a n d as a result, f e m i n i s m becomes the censor of
pleasure a n d sexuality. It thus reinstates itself i n the place
of patriarchal m o r a l i s m , w h i c h it wishes to c o n d e m n . A s I
have argued, this is because it is based o n a p r o b l e m a t i c
n o t i o n of gender identity, w h i c h i n itself is l i n k e d to a
particular view of language — one w h i c h falls i n t o the
" t r a p of representational coherence."
Part II — T h e P o l i t i c s of Pleasure: Patti S m i t h ' s " G l o r i a "
T h e reason I raise these issues is not s i m p l y for the
perverse pleasure of disagreement, but because these theoretical questions are also strategic questions. T h e p o i n t of
course is that one cannot transcend one's c o n d i t i o n c o m pletely. There is n o t h i n g outside patriarchy o r capitalism
that is somehow u n s u l l i e d . A l t h o u g h there are margins,
they are never completely free from that w h i c h is d o m i nant or hegemonic; indeed, perhaps we s h o u l d stop u s i n g
these terms as i f there were o n l y two positions, m a r g i n /
centre, i n / o u t , w o m a n / m a n . We o n l y ever operate w i t h i n
complex matrices of power; and it is the way we construct
o u r symbolic relationship to the w o r l d that constitutes
ideology a n d language as a lived relationship; hence the
battle for the c o n t r o l of m e a n i n g — the battle a r o u n d
discourse — are economic, social and p o l i t i c a l questions.
T o show h o w ideology is inscribed i n lyrics, a n d to
understand one strategy that w o m e n can employ to subvert their p o s i t i o n i n g i n this system, I w i l l focus m y analysis o n a specific song: Patti Smith's 1975 version of the rock
classic " G l o r i a " o r i g i n a l l y recorded by V a n M o r r i s o n a n d
T h e m ten years earlier. Smith's brilliant rewriting of this
song intervenes i n t o the o r i g i n a l text, i n t e r r u p t i n g its
placement of w o m a n as a fetishistic object of m a l e desire,
produced by a n d for a p r e d o m i n a n t l y male l i s t e n i n g
audience, r e i n s c r i b i n g , i n fact, what it means to be a
sexually active fe/male i n o u r culture. R e c o g n i s i n g that
the generic w o m a n , G l o r i a , is also herself a n d a metaphor
for her o w n suppressed sexual pleasure, she gives a voice to
this w o m a n ; a w o m a n w h o was o r i g i n a l l y spoken of by
M o r r i s o n , a n d not a n active speaking subject. S m i t h does
not s i m p l y insert a " w o m a n ' s point of v i e w " i n t o the song,
nor does she replace a "negative image of w o m a n " for
another more " p o s i t i v e image of w o m a n " ; she displaces
her o r i g i n a l subject p o s i t i o n , thereby q u e s t i o n i n g the
n o t i o n of a static o r fixed male or female gender identity
w i t h a set of c o r r e s p o n d i n g characteristics a n d behaviours.
27
28
Recent French feminist criticism, a n d the w o r k of British feminists centered around the now defunct j o u r n a l m/f,
have b r o u g h t to o u r attention that what is problematic
about patriarchy is not s i m p l y the stereotypes it portrays
of w o m e n , but the hierarchical r e l a t i o n s h i p it establishes
between the sexes i n social institutions a n d the very structure of o u r language; hence, the term " p a t r i a r c h y " has
become usurped by the n e o l o g i s m " p h a l l o g o c e n t r i s m . "
T h i s leads to analyses not s i m p l y of the content of images,
but the structure of narratives to understand the way subject positions are constituted w i t h i n the lyrics a n d i n the
larger social field. T h i s provides feminist musicologists
w i t h valuable tools for a n a l y z i n g the way that images
" p o s i t i o n , " rather than "represent" w o m e n — it is w i t h i n
this context that we can then decide whether these images
are restricting o r h a r m f u l to w o m e n — that is, if they are
sexist.
29
T h e m ' s o r i g i n a l version of " G l o r i a " provides some
i m p o r t a n t methodological lessons for feminist analyses of
rock m u s i c . I n c o m p a r i s o n to other rock songs, it is not
overtly sexist; that is, it does not depict e x p l i c i t l y degradi n g or h a r m f u l images of w o m e n ; yet it is paradigmatic i n
other respects. T h i s specific song is part of this larger
intertextual/sexual network of oppression that G a y a t r i
Spivak characterizes i n this way:
...the patrynomic...keeps the transcendental ego of
the dynasty identical i n the eye of the father. T h e
irreducible importance of the name a n d the law i n
this s i t u a t i o n makes it quite clear that the question
is not merely one of the psycho-social-sexual behavi o u r , but the p r o d u c t i o n a n d c o n s o l i d a t i o n of reference a n d m e a n i n g . T h e desire to make one's p r o geny represent his presence is also the desire to make
one's words represent the f u l l m e a n i n g of one's
i n t e n t i o n . Hermeneutic, legal, o r p a t r i l i n e a l , it is
the prerogative of the p h a l l u s to declare itself sovereign source...
30
Because it is based o n a n identification w i t h the symbolic
power that the penis represents i n patriarchal culture,
" p h a l l o g o c e n t r i s m " is not a p o s i t i o n restricted to b i o l o g i cal m e n : it is also a p o s i t i o n that w o m e n can take u p a n d
identify w i t h ; it is a p o s i t i o n of power w h i c h privileges the
p h a l l u s . T h i s text, M o r r i s o n ' s " G l o r i a , " w i t h its linear
narrative of desire, its p o s i t i o n i n g of the p h a l l u s as the
d e t e r m i n i n g moment, the p o i n t towards w h i c h the narrative moves, is indeed phallogocentric, constructed a r o u n d
a teleology of male conquest over w o m a n . W i t h i n the
narrative, she is both present a n d absent: present as that
w h i c h is to be captured, possessed a n d controlled; absent
as self-determining subject.
31
M o r r i s o n begins by describing G l o r i a ' s b e w i t c h i n g
physical attributes: " f i v e feet f o u r , " " h a i r of dark b r o w n , "
she is the w o m a n of his dreams w h o "comes a r o u n d " : a
e u p h e m i s m for her sexual availability. Part of the effectiveness of this rock song, like many other rock songs, is its
use of repetition. T o create an air of suspense, a n d to
suspend the c l i m a x , M o r r i s o n repeats the message that she
not o n l y comes a r o u n d , but that she comes a r o u n d here
"at about m i d n i g h t " to make h i m feel "so g o o d " a n d "so
fine."
H e spells her name. T h i s is the w e l l - k n o w n chorus of
" G l o r i a " . G - L - O - R - I - A , G l o r i a : derived f r o m the religious term " G l o r y " : to give exalted praise, h o n o u r or
distinction; resplendent beauty or magnificence; state of
absolute happiness or contentment; the splendour and
bliss of heaven; to go to glory; to die. H i s f u l f i l l m e n t . H i s
ecstacy. H i s transcendent moment. T h e subsumption of
her identity a n d her pleasure to his — at the same time her
name is i n v o k e d precisely to represent this pleasure. G l o r i a . A name a p t l y chosen to represent a l l w o m e n , for as a
s i g n of sexual pleasure she is every w o m a n , Sherry,
Wendy, Sandy, Susie, w h o has ever been named as a male
fantasy w i t h i n the narrative rock a n d r o l l .
She is a fetish object i n both the Freudian and M a r x i s t
sense: a way of c o n t r o l l i n g his fear a n d anxiety of her a n d
the threat of potential castration that Freud says w o m e n
pose to men: " a token of t r i u m p h over the threat of castrat i o n and a safeguard against i t . " However, both Freud
a n d M a r x d i d not adequately theorize the p o s i t i o n of
w o m e n w i t h i n the process of this fetishization — this has
been the important c o n t r i b u t i o n of feminist theory of
spectatorship, w h i c h has developed p r i m a r i l y w i t h i n the
context of f i l m theory. T o briefly summarize, as L a u r a
M u l v e y shows i n her analysis of fetishism, w o m e n occupy
three relations to the p h a l l u s i n most images: they are
portrayed w i t h p h a l l i c substitutes, such as w h i p s , or
spiked heels, a n d i n this case they are d o m i n a n t and
represent a threat; or they are being p u n i s h e d w i t h a
p h a l l i c object, i n w h i c h case they are subordinate; or they
themselves are portrayed as p h a l l i c objects of male desire
t h r o u g h the p o s i t i o n i n g of their bodies, or i n this case, the
invocation of their names. C o n t i n u a l l y f i g u r i n g w o m e n
as a sexual object to be captured is perhaps a sign of male
fear a n d anxiety about their o w n sexuality as it is defined
w i t h i n patriarchy. In this sense (and there may be others),
fetishism a n d sexism are the t u r n i n g away f r o m woman's
sexual difference a n d the failure to comprehend it f r o m
any perspective other than i n relationship to male sexuality — the presence or the absence of a penis. It is a f i x a t i o n
w i t h " w o m a n ' ' w h i c h u p h o l d s a patriarchal system out of
32
33
a l o o k of disbelief. P a r a d o x i c a l l y , it oscillates between an
exalted fascination of w o m a n as other, a n d the degradat i o n of this sexual difference; thus, w o m a n ' s sexuality is
often given a mystical, supernatural force at the same time
it is seen as a threat to be controlled.
54
However, it is a sexual economy that is tied to the
economic a n d social reality of male ownership a n d control
of women's bodies a n d o u r sexuality; a n d the confusion of
exaltation a n d degradation often produces o u r o w n comp l i c i t y w i t h this system. D e v o i d of any reality i n this male
economy of desire, we w o m e n become, as M a r x says, fetishistic commodities; o u r sexuality is given a mystical
o r i g i n a n d nature, divorced from a life process and the
process of (re-)production w i t h i n social practices. We
become things to be bought, sold, a n d circulated; an endless c i r c u l a t i o n of infinitely replaceable women's names.
35
T h e second verse after the first chorus conveys the d u a l
aspects of suspense a n d conquest by i n c o r p o r a t i n g a m i l itary m a r c h i n g r h y t h m as a musical code to indicate her
arrival: we f o l l o w her movements as she walks d o w n his
street, to his house, she knocks o n his door to make him
feel a l l right. T h e narrative celebrates his sexuality, w h i c h
is emphasized by the use of the first person possessive
" m y " at the b e g i n n i n g of street, house, door, a n d r o o m .
T h e sequence does not reflect a male sexual ontology, but
normalizes it as active. She is d r a w n to the song f r o m his
perspective. H e r sexuality exists o n l y i n relation to his
prick, the p h a l l u s , w h i c h is literally the p o i n t o n the
h o r i z o n to w h i c h she moves. She does not forthrightly
express her desires or needs. T o do so w o u l d challenge the
p r i v i l e g e d p o s i t i o n of the p h a l l u s — it w o u l d be " u n l a d y like."
However, the song itself remains a celebration and
encouragement of sexual pleasure through its techniques
of repetition, meter, rhyme, a n d r h y t h m . It is c o m p e l l i n g ,
danceable, f u n ; thus, i n relationship to its lyrics, we, as
w o m e n , are placed i n a contradictory p o s i t i o n . M e n can
identify w i t h , indeed s i n g the lyrics w i t h o u t upsetting any
heterosexual c u l t u r a l norms. H o w e v e r , if w o m e n listen to
the lyrics a n d s i n g them, they can do so o n l y f r o m two
positions: either they identify w i t h " G l o r i a " and accept
their p o s i t i o n i n g as passive objects; or if they decide to
s i n g of sexual pleasure, i n patriarchal culture, they first do
so f r o m the p o s i t i o n of the male voice before they can
move beyond this p o s i t i o n .
T h i s is the paradox explored by Patti S m i t h . H e r version of " G l o r i a " displaces the phallogocentrism of the
o r i g i n a l narrative t h r o u g h her occupation of a series of
subject positions, s u n g i n a p o l y p h o n y of voices: the son,
the female hysteric, the generic w o m a n , a specific w o m a n ,
the lesbian w o m a n . T o correspond to these different identifications, S m i t h breaks apart the linearity of the m u s i c a l
structure i n t o four different movements: the introductory
narrative; her moment of transgression as she masquerades as the son; her m o m e n t of r e c o g n i t i o n that she a n d
G l o r i a are "the same," leading to their c l i m a x i n an autoerotic or lesbian encounter outside of patriarchal l a w ; a n d
the denouement where she is reminded of her sin a n d
re-enters " n o r m a l c u l t u r e , " albeit simultaneously transformed and transforming the boundaries of normality.
It is Smith's genius that she makes clear the connection
between male privilege, the m o d e r n rock a n d r o l l tale a n d
b i b l i c a l m y t h ; she subtitles her version of " G l o r i a , " " I n
Excelsis Deo: G l o r y to G o d o n H i g h e s t , " the great d o x o l ogy i n C h r i s t i a n i t y exclaimed by the shepherds at the
m o m e n t of Christ's birth. Immediately she challenges the
C h r i s t i a n belief that G o d gave the w o r l d his o n l y son for
o u r salvation. "Jesus died for Somebody's s i n s , " she says,
" b u t not m i n e . " Because accepting this m y t h means that
one accepts its hierarchical p r i v i l e g i n g of sons over
daughters, S m i t h replies that salvation w i l l have to wait;
" m y sins they belong to me, m e . "
S m i t h understands the possible consequences of her
rejection a n d instead of a t o n i n g , c o m p l y i n g , she pushes
her sin even further. " P e o p l e say beware, but I don't care;
their words are just rules a n d regulations to me, m e . "
Rejecting these rules a n d regulations w h i c h confine her,
the p o s i t i o n that S m i t h first adopts is that of a male figure,
perhaps C h r i s t , the son. H e r vocal p o s i t i o n is that of a
cocky, self-assured male. T h i s is marked by both a tempo
a n d r h y t h m change, from the dirge of the narrative to a
jazz tempo a n d s w i n g . L i k e the p h a l l i c mother w h o recognizes the power of male sexuality but does not challenge
its p o s i t i o n , she is content to appropriate its power for
herself. She walks i n t o a r o o m , p r o u d , i g n o r i n g her fears,
m o v i n g beyond what is appropriate sexual behaviour for
w o m e n . She feels that a n y t h i n g is a l l o w e d .
However, her journey w i t h i n , a n d then outside of this
symbolic universe has just begun; p h a l l i c mothers or
wayward daughters masquerading as sons face p u n i s h ment a n d social r e c r i m i n a t i o n for their hubris. S m i t h
holds this p o s i t i o n u n t i l , as she says, "she looks out the
w i n d o w a n d sees a sweet y o u n g t h i n g " , " l e a n i n g o n the
p a r k i n g meter". T h i s w i n d o w is not s i m p l y a w i n d o w to
a n external w o r l d where she encounters another separate
being: it is also a m i r r o r w h i c h reflects her personal a n d
social p o s i t i o n back to herself a n d forces her to recognise
her subject p o s i t i o n w i t h i n this patriarchal order.
T h i s is a n important moment i n the song, for it is at this
p o i n t of her rejection of her disguise as a " s o n of the
father" that also marks her i n a b i l i t y to h o l d the p h a l l i c
p o s i t i o n as the p o i n t f r o m w h i c h her desires circulates. It
is her o w n image as other that she sees; thus she shifts from
a masculine p o s i t i o n to the comprehension that this other
is herself; i n psychoanalytic terms, it is the p o i n t of identification a n d transference. H o w e v e r , it is also a reversal of
L a c a n ' s m i r r o r stage; instead of l i n k i n g her " i " to a
socially elaborated situation (the symbolic), her eye/i has
entry out of this social symbolic order. T h e desire that she
has is n o longer to occupy the p o s i t i o n of the son, but for
this other w h o is s p l i t off f r o m herself, denied to h e r —
w o m a n . O n e of the contradictions w i t h i n patriarchy a n d
i n the process of the fetishistic c o m m o d i f i c a t i o n of
women's bodies, is that it makes b o t h m e n a n d w o m e n
desire w o m e n ' s bodies—although for w o m e n , the cons u m m a t i o n of this desire is short circuited because of
taboos against homosexuality.
chorus "she was so good, she was so f i n e , " c h a n g i n g the
declaration that she w i l l make G l o r i a hers i n t o the present
tense.
A l t h o u g h at this p o i n t i n her m u s i c a l text, S m i t h has
not made any e x p l i c i t m u s i c a l references to the o r i g i n a l , it
is at this p o i n t of transference that she recalls M o r r i s o n ' s
words. She repeats the lines f r o m the o r i g i n a l , " O she
looked so good, o she looked so fine, a n d I've got this crazy
feeling that I ' m g o i n g to make her m i n e . " T h i s second
move, the movement outside of the symbolic netherworld
i n t o the presymbolic, the unconscious or the semiotic is
a g a i n marked w i t h a tempo change; the c a l m , collected
i m i t a t i o n of a jazz style is replaced w i t h the fast a n d
frenzied pace of a typical rock song. C o r r e s p o n d i n g w i t h
this tempo change, there is also a change i n the tenor of
Smith's voice; she sings i n a higher, more sexually charged
p i t c h . It is also w o r t h n o t i n g , that u n l i k e M o r r i s o n , S m i t h
defers the moment of n a m i n g ; she does not name " h e r "
u n t i l the m o m e n t of recognition a n d merger of the two
personalities; it is at this m o m e n t that the repressed voice
of " G l o r i a " w i l l be brought i n t o the song.
T h i s pleasure is not something that S m i t h wants to
hide: she w i l l tell the w o r l d "that I made her m i n e . " She
brings to the surface the connection between sexuality a n d
possession; but w h i l e i n M o r r i s o n ' s text " w o m a n " is positioned as the object and possession of male desire, i n
Smith's text, the desire is the desire of w o m a n for w o m a n ;
thus, it is a f o r m of self-possession. A t this point, the song's
narrative is punctuated w i t h Smith's verbalization of G l o ria's name. She repeats the mode of the s p e l l i n g of the
name inaugurated by M o r r i s o n , p a y i n g particular attent i o n to the repetition of the letter " i " to underscore the
p o i n t that s h e / G l o r i a are one and the same. T h e music
reaches a crescendo, as s h e / G l o r i a climaxes.
36
S m i t h loses c o n t r o l at this p o i n t , her voice c o n t a i n i n g
resonances of hysteria. She imitates/mocks the degradat i o n that she, as a l l w o m e n , has suffered through countless
rock songs, r e c o u n t i n g it i n order to move beyond it:
" T h e n I step o n her, here she comes." H e r c o n f u s i o n i n
this section of the tune expresses her anger a n d resentment
for h a v i n g been made the passive object of his gaze, a n d the
vacillations between subject positions that she is exper i e n c i n g as she recognizes herself as her o w n object of
desire. S m i t h recreates this p r i m a l scene of G l o r i a ' s entry
i n t o the m a s c u l i n e economy of desire. She repeats M o r r i son's progression of movement; d o w n the street, t h r o u g h
the door, u p the stairs, t h r o u g h the halls. She repeats the
A t this p o i n t i n the narrative, S m i t h hears k n o c k i n g o n
her door: she looks u p , and like M o r r i s o n , she sees that it is
m i d n i g h t , the h o u r of magic, transformation, metamorphosis — the w i t c h i n g hour. " G l o r i a " leans o n the couch,
whispers to her a n d they take the b i g p l u n g e , w h i c h she
substitutes for M o r r i s o n ' s c o m i n g . G l o r i a tells S m i t h her
name; S m i t h indicates the c o n s u m m a t i o n of their desire
by replacing the verb "to l o o k , " i n the phrase "she looked
so g o o d , " to "she was so f i n e " . It is a shared m o m e n t of
pleasure, not s i m p l y a n a p p r o p r i a t i o n of the experience of
pleasure by the other, w h i c h w o u l d repeat the pattern of
sexuality as possession a n d ownership; not ecstacy as
transcendence outside of the body, "the splendour a n d
bliss of heaven," but the ecstacy of experiencing sensation
without every part of one's body — f u l l embodiment.
T h e i r m u t u a l pleasure is interrupted by " k n o c k s o n the
d o o r . " She cannot remain outside the p h a l l i c order w i t h out once again being p u n i s h e d for her rejection of " n a t u r a l " heterosexual relations. G u i l t y : for rejecting her posit i o n as passive, non-speaking subject w i t h i n the o r i g i n a l
song; g u i l t y : for rejecting the p h a l l u s as the p o i n t f r o m
w h i c h pleasure is generated, either through auto-affection
or lesbianism; g u i l t y : for w a n t i n g to make her knowledge
of this pleasure p u b l i c . She references another M o r r i s o n
song, "Brown-eyed G i r l " at this moment of confused
frenzy: " W h o ' s at the stadium? T w e n t y thousand girls are
c o m i n g after her"; she hears the bells chime, r e m i n d i n g
her that o r d i n a r y time ultimately governs. A s she reaches
the f i n a l scene, the pace again slows a n d as she is brought
to consciousness, she ends the song w i t h her first words,
"Jesus died for somebody's sins...but not m i n e , " leading
i n t o the chorus of G l o r i a ; ultimately rejecting the g u i l t she
is supposed to feel for her displacement of m a n as active
37
subject, w o m a n as passive object, not i n their simple reversal but by s h i f t i n g between these subject positions w i t h i n
the narrative of the song.
Smith's r e - w r i t i n g of M o r r i s o n ' s song succeeds i n capt u r i n g and replicating the vitality of a rock a n d r o l l song;
it is urgent, simple, moves the body to dance, a n d the l i p s
to sing. Yet a r o u n d these elements she constructs a beautif u l l y woven narrative that does not suppress the o r i g i n a l ,
but uses a n already familiar tune w i t h i n the history of rock
to over-write, over-lay the o r i g i n a l w i t h a lesbian story of
female desire, seduction a n d sexual pleasure. It is a complex sexual/textual subversion w h i c h displaces the name
of the father, breaking apart, r u p t u r i n g the o r i g i n a l
r h y t h m a l l o w i n g her o w n economy of desire to circulate.
T h i s method of over-writing breaks d o w n the musical
structure of the o r i g i n a l by i m p l e m e n t i n g tempo a n d
r h y t h m changes that are used to mark shifts i n the subject
positions that she plays w i t h i n the narrative. She does not
s i m p l y reject the o r i g i n a l as if she c o u l d reject the history
of patriarchy, w h i c h has sculpted the language w i t h i n
w h i c h we speak a n d the genres w i t h i n w h i c h we write. She
appropriates its power, not i n a simple reversal of subject
positions, but she transforms it w h i l e refusing the attempt
to fix her as a passive, fetishized object devoid of subjectivity, devoid of sexual desires. H e r o w n subjectivity is constantly displaced from one place to another; f r o m a
socially identifiable masculine p o s i t i o n to the recognition
of the exclusion of female desire. She challenges the fixity
of these socially circumscribed identities so that the ahistorical i m m u t a b i l i t y of sexual identity is itself challenged.
I n c o n c l u s i o n , the feminist concern w i t h language is
not s i m p l y a game of the insertion or substitution of
p r o n o u n s (he/she) i n t o sentences. It encompasses a larger
issue, as it is through the ideological myths of a fixed
s o c i a l / s y m b o l i c identity, a n d the p r i v i l e g i n g of the p h a l lus, not just i n terms of content, but i n terms of structure,
that patriarchal ideology is perpetuated. A s Teresa de
Lauretis says, a l t h o u g h we m i g h t feel annoyance at havi n g to participate i n this game, language and metaphors
do not inherently belong to one sex; signs can be detached
f r o m their o r i g i n a l meanings w h i c h are never completely
anchored. T h i s is a n important p o i n t , for it helps us to
understand the difference between a n d analysis w h i c h
looks at language from a deconstructive/discursive p o i n t
of view, a n d an analysis of language performed by a traditional content analysis i n sociology: the former understands the language as h a v i n g a poetic, metaphorical,
parodic o r social d i m e n s i o n ; the latter treats l i n g u i s t i c
meanings as literal, fixed, not subject to the processes of
58
historical a n d c u l t u r a l transformation; the former sees the
critic as always p a r t i c i p a t i n g a n d hence c o m p l i c i t i n this
language a n d this culture; the latter grants the educated
c r i tic omniscience i n relation to society; s/he can see what
the rest of mass culture o n l y consumes.
T h i s u n f i x i n g requires both theoretical labour a n d a
concerted p o l i t i c a l effort by feminists. F o r one person to
choose to transform language is not enough; meanings are
beyond the grasp of any one i n d i v i d u a l . However, they are
not necessarily beyond the control of collective p o l i t i c a l
and c u l t u r a l action by i n d i v i d u a l s w h o choose to engage
i n this transformation. T h u s we must move beyond the
polarities of fatalism a n d idealism: fatalism w h i c h accepts
i m m u t a b i l i t y of a l l m e a n i n g , and idealism w h i c h believes
that i n d i v i d u a l , personal transformation is tantamount to
social change.
A l t h o u g h her version of G l o r i a never made B i l l b o a r d ' s
top 100, its impact s h o u l d not be dismissed. It is a n i m p o r tant example of h o w w o m e n can e m p l o y traditionally
male genres of music, dislodge male hegemony w i t h i n
them, a n d f i n d a voice that speaks by a n d for w o m e n .
59
NOTES
1.
Deborah Harding and Emily Nett, "Women and Rock Music,"
Atlantis, vol. 10, no. 1 (Autumn, 1984), pp. 61-76. One of the few
sources on women and music is Sue Steward and Sheryl Garret,
Signed sealed and delivered: of Women in Pop, (London: Pluto
Press, 1984). See also Elizabeth Wood "Women in Music," Signs,
vol. 6, no. 2 (1981).
2. Teresa de Lauretis, Alice Doesn't: Feminism, Semiotics, Cinema,
(Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1984), p. 163.
3. This phrase is used by de Lauretis in A lice Doesn't, p. 9. The idea of
sexuality as produced by different social technologies is taken from
Michel Foucault's work on sexuality, see: Michel Foucault, The
History of Sexuality: vol. 1, An Introduction, trans. Robert Hurley
(New York: Pantheon Books, 1978). Although indebted to Foucault,
I find that Foucault's work does not pay adequate attention to the
different engendering processes for men and women, and it tends to
reduce the subject to a receptor of discourses dismissing the psychoanalytic dimension which makes our acceptance and possible
resistance to different discourses possible or impossible. As I will
explain, Foucault s writings on sexuality as they are being revised
and re-thought by women allows us to go beyond conceptualizing
our ontological differences from men as based ultimately on
women's biological difference from men. While one cannot dispense with the importance of biology as a marker of sexual difference, recent feminist literature shows how the body has become
invested with meaning. See two recent anthologies, Susan Rubin
Suleiman ed. The Female Body in Western Culture: Contemporary
Perspectives, (London: Harvard University Press, 1986) and Catherine Gallagher and Thomas Lacquer eds. The Making of the Modern Body: Sex and Sexuality in the 19th Century (Berkley: University
of California Press, 1987). Other interesting feminist work is being
done on the problem of this relationship between identity and
politics. See Linda Nicholson and Nancy Fraser "Social Criticism
Without Philosophy: An Encounter Between Feminism and Postmodernism" Communication, vol. 10, (1988), pp.345-366. As well,
see anthologies by Teresa de Lauretis ed., Feminist Studies/Critical
Studies, (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1986), and Seyla
Benhabiband Drucilla Cornell eds. Feminism as Critique (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1987).
4. de Lauretis, Alice, p. 165.
5. Harding and Nett, p. 64.
6. Ibid, p. 61.
7. Ibid, pp. 64-5.
8. Ibid, p. 64.
9. Ibid, p. 65.
10. Ibid, p. 69.
11. Ibid, p. 64.
12. Rough Trade, "Physical Violence," Avoid Freud (CBS, 1980).
13. Harding and Nett, p. 67.
14. The notion of representation is problematic because it assumes that
there is an originary point that is the base from which the reflection
takes place. I have discussed this problem in "Tales of Inscription/
Fashion Statements," Canadian Journal of Political and Social
Theory, vol. 11, nos. 1-2 (Winter/Spring, 1987), pp. 60-3.
15. Harding and Nett, p. 66.
16. Ibid, p. 63.
17. Ibid, p. 65.
18. Ibid, pp. 68-9. Women performers such as Lydia Lunch, Karen
Finley and Nina Hagen use their sexuality to challenge the dominant cultural representations of female sexuality. While their music
is played primarily within the musical underground, these undercurrents are important as an alternative to the mainstream, and have
an important impact on what becomes the mainstream. Within
country music, Canada's k.d. lang has achieved an enormous popularity with her strategy of parodying the genre that allows her to play
both inside and outside its codes. Lang's energetic and challenging
on-stage antics, choice of costume, refusal to wear make-up, and
powerful renditions of country classics is another interesting example of ways in which women can change or challenge the musical
mainstream.
19. Ibid, p. 63. It is interesting to note that within the music industry,
there has been a recent resurgence of the tradition of "folk music" by
performers such as Tracey Chapman and Suzanne Vega. While
neither Chapman's and Vega's approach is explicitly sexual, they
are still playing with the sensuality of lyrics, music and image. The
acceptance of their work within the musical mainstream is interesting. In particular, Chapman's work does this while still putting
forth strong political messages about race, class, and gender relations, although Vega's hit song "Luka" is about wife beating.
20. Elizabeth Cowie, "Women, Representation and the Image," Screen
Education, no. 23 (Summer, 1977), p. 18. See also Griselda Pollack,
"What's Wrong with Images of Women?," Screen Education, no. 24
(Autumn, 1977), pp. 25-33.
21. Harding and Nett, p. 65.
22. Simon Frith and Angela McRobbie, "Rock and Sexuality," Screen
Education, no. 29(1978-79), p. 4.
23. Harding and Nett, p. 61. On this point, see Lawrence Grossberg's
article '"I'd Rather Feel Bad Than Not Feel Anything At AU': Rock
and Roll, Pleasure and Power," Enclitic, vol. 8, nos. 1-2, (SpringFall, 1984).
23. Ibid, p. 65.
25. Ibid, p. 68.
26. Ibid.
27. Patti Smith, "Gloria In Excelsis Deo," Horses (Arista, 1975). Them
featuring Van Morrison, "Gloria" (Polygram, 1983).
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
Julia Kristeva, "Women's Time," Feminist Theory: A Critique of
Ideology, eds., N.O. Keohane and M.Z. Rosaldo, and B.C. Gelpi
(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982), pp. 31-54. Another
interesting way to consider "Gloria" would be in relation to Kristeva's discussion of the "third" feminist moment, which she outlines
in this essay. It seems to me that this "third" position, which
incorporates aspects of the first two positions described by Kristeva,
while at the same time moving beyond them, has a similar conception of historical time as that played out in Smith's "Gloria,"
although I am not implying that Smith is intentionally a feminist.
While biographical details can contribute to our understanding of
intratextual conditions of production and reception, I have avoided
biographical details in this essay because of lack of space. I feel
comfortable in omitting them because once a work is produced and
put into social circulation, it has a life and acquires meanings that
may be beyond the author's expressed intentions. For a discussion of
this theory of authorship, see Jacques Derrida, "Signature Event
Context," Margins of Philosophy trans. Alan Bass (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1982) pp. 307-330.
Parveen Adams and Elizabeth Cowie, "Interview-1984" mlf, nos.
11-12 (1986), pp. 5-16. See also the volume New French Feminism:
An Anthology, eds., Elaine Marks and Isabelle de Courtivron (New
York: Schoken Books, 1981).
Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, "Displacement and the Discourse of
Woman," Displacement: Derrida and After, ed. Mark Krupnick
(Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1983), p. 169.
de Lauretis, Alice, pp. 12-36.
Sigmund Freud, "Fetishism" (1927), Sexuality and the Psychology
of Love ed., Phillip Reiff (New York: Collier Books, 1978), p. 216.
Laura Mulvey, "You Don't Know What is Happening Do You, Mr.
Jones," Framing Feminism eds., Griselda Pollack and Roszika
Parker (Great Britain: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1986), pp.
127-131.
Kaja Silverman discusses women's ambivalent relationship to the
concept of fetishism in The Acoustic Mirror: The Female Voice in
Psychoanalysis and the Cinema (Bloomington: Indiana University
Press, 1988).
Karl Marx, Capital: vol. 1, trans. Ben Fowkes (New York: Vintage
Books, 1977), pp. 164-65. See also Michael Taussig's explication of
the concept of fetishism in The Devil and Commodity Fetishism in
South America (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina
Press, 1980), pp. 3-12. Gayle Rubin's "The Traffic in Women: Notes
toward a Political Economy of Sex," in Toward an Anthropology of
Women, ed. Rayna Reiter (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1975),
pp. 157-210, is a classical analysis of women within this system of
exchange.
Jacques Lacan, "The Mirror Stage" Ecrits: A Selection trans. Alan
Sheridan (New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 1977), pp. 1-7.
Jacques Derrida, Of Grammatology, trans. Gayatri Chakravorty
Spivak (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1976), p. 174.
Derrida makes an important distinction between auto-affection as
"self-love" and the "love of self," or an individualistic self-centeredness.
de Lauretis, A lice, pp. 34-6.
I would like to thank Kathy D. for her support and enthusiasm. This
essay is the result of her love, friendship, and patience in listening to
its many permutations, and is dedicated to her.