Critical Review Set 1 # 3

Cohen, Sara: "Rock Music and the Production of Gender"

This essay is intended to take a look at the gendered elements of a so-called "local scene", particularly the indie rock scene present in Liverpool in the 1990's. The thesis of her article is that the scene is dominated both in terms of participation and in terms of discourse by males. Her argument here hinges on a serious of examples (although these of are dubious account) in which she claims to see male hegemony excluding females on several fronts. Further along, she offers a slight counterinsight when she problematizes the monolithic conception of masculinity within the space of this specific music scene. She writes that, "Liverpool's rock scene involves the performance of rather traditional gender roles and ideology, with dominating the scene and excluding women from their activities, yet it also involves the performance of alternative or contradictory masculinities." (34). The essay concludes with a brief note on the contradictory conceptions of what a scene means, taking this question on from a theoretical perspective and an ethnographic perspective.

Question:
Cohen's assertion that women are actively, or even passively, "excluded" from the Liverpool rock scene is hardly justified by her argumentation in this article. First with regards to the presence of women in the tastemaking quarters of the record shop, Cohen establishes that the banter is designed to exclude the presence of women for an assemblage of reasons. Nonetheless she provides no plausible example of any intent of this sort. Later in reference to female attendance at shows and venues in blighted neighborhoods, she writes that, "these are areas where many, particularly women, might feel uncomfortable venturing into at night". (Cohen 20) This comment is guilty of either speculation (what are the statistics of assault?), selective reasoning (are these areas not dangerous to men also?), or even perhaps a note of maternalist rhetoric (women, with their generalized temperament, ought not enter such debased urban areas). Both of these instances lapse into the rhetoric and trucculent tone of a victimhood narrative unsubstantiated by compelling reasoning. I am curious as to whether the class agrees with this criticism and if they do, what effect does this have on the overall impact of the essay?