COLLAPSE BOARD

19 Responses to “Five Female-Fronted Rock Bands To Watch in 2013”

1. Andrew Sheets says:

   December 28, 2012 at 10:42 am

   I’m lucky enough to have seen three of the five bands listed here live, and own releases from these groups. All totally worth checking out.

   However, what’s with the Women In Rock angle? Is this still a novelty somehow? As we enter 2013, are we amazed to see to see non-males be able to lead bands, write songs, and shred live? Could someone on Collapseboard write an article for “Five Male-Fronted Rock Bands To Watch in 2013?” without it being a bitter satire or utterly ridiculous?

   The author states that “Rock’n’roll is about laying it on the line. It’s about attitude. It’s about tradition. It’s about rule-breaking. It’s about rhythm. It’s about chaos. It’s about passion, kicks, hate, love, fear, joy, fun.”

   So what do you call that thing that involves folk pushing seventy milking it for whatever it’s worth, long wanky solos, Champagne Supernova, Rattle n’ Hum, crowd singalongs, supergroups, and whatever Paul McCartney was doing with the surviving members of Nirvana? All seem to be the very opposite of what the author means, or what anybody here is supposed to enjoy but are no more or less part of that wilderbeast we call Rn’R..

   One clue is how one of these artists was described as having been kicked out of a group for being TOO SERIOUS. And then records a little ditty called DILNO. Somebody pass me the lithium.

   Will we ever see a female-fronted rock group that’s frivolous/up its own arse/play math-rock/not otherwise be boxed into nice little packages or be invested with having to carry the weight of our aspirations? In other words, be something other than in lock-step with what would have come out of Olympia in 1991 or Basildon in the late 70s?

   Is this how Riot Grrrl died the first time?
2. Everett True says:

   December 28, 2012 at 11:15 am

   Is this how Riot Grrrl died the first time?

   What an odd question. Do subcultures suddenly die when the mainstream no longer pays attention? Surely, the whole point of subcultures is that they’re separate from the mainstream. Or are you referring to the fact you personally weren’t aware of Riot Grrrl after a certain point in time? In which case, shouldn’t your question be:

   Is this why I wasn’t aware of Riot Grrrl after a certain point in time?

   … and the answer would still be no. You not being aware of something is far more indicative of your strengths and failings as an observer, a participant, a consumer, than whether that something still exists or not.

   P.S. Punk never actually died the day the mainstream said it did, either.
3. Andrew Sheets says:

   December 29, 2012 at 6:16 am

   I see. Riot Grrrl (and its male counterpart, Punk…see what I did there?) had no end, it is as eternal and ephemeral as any and all other human endeavor. I have been suitably enlightened. But I don’t know if one could properly boil down what I was asking to that question, though based on what I’m reading elsewhere, it may speak more to your angle about engagement, which I guess was the cudgel that got swung at my direction. Fair enough, the critical process is essentially adversarial, as well as observational, that is, if a critic doesn’t get wind of a movement, does it get heard? Is that a failing of the movement or of the critic? I think you certainly know that answer.

   Is it a miracle that in the great, terrible age of interconnectedness that subcultures continue to be fermented, and that we have not all drowned in a vat of PSY, Goyte and Katy Rae Jepsen? Was it fair of me to link Grass Widow or Wax Idols to the tradition of underground feminist punk rock? Was it more or less fair than to be told about which female-fronted “Rock `n’ Roll” bands to watch out for in the coming new year, and to be given a definition of that that much more closely matches the ideals of “riot grrrl” than wanting to twist that particular mainstream label to suit your narrative, when it should have been discarded in the dustbin, but for some odd reason, the author chose to link to these particular groups.
4. Erika Meyer says:

   December 29, 2012 at 2:32 pm

   A couple of responses to Andrew Sheets:

   1. “As we enter 2013, are we amazed to see to see non-males be able to lead bands, write songs, and shred live?”

   It’s weird, isn’t it. But after spending the past decade as a pretty serious musician, and working in many different band scenarios, I have come to a certain understanding of some of these weird dynamics. I think it deserves an article of its own, actually. But think of it like this: it’s not that females are somehow unable to lead a band, it’s that some men are not so COMFORTABLE with the idea of a female leading a band. This includes many male musicians, journalists, and others. Because it helps, in any endeavor, to have people believe in you, I think that females bandleaders begin with some cards stacked against them. My experience is that female songwriters generally have to work harder to form a band, struggle more to keep a band together, and are more likely to be ignored by critics and journalists and such. I think it’s important to combat that. That’s why I wrote the article.

   2. “Was it more or less fair than to be told about which female-fronted “Rock `n’ Roll” bands to watch out for in the coming new year, and to be given a definition of that that much more closely matches the ideals of “riot grrrl” than wanting to twist that particular mainstream label to suit your narrative, when it should have been discarded in the dustbin, but for some odd reason, the author chose to link to these particular groups.”

   I think what you are saying is that “rock” is a moldy old mainstream label and it’s not appropriate for the bands I’ve chosen. Yet Grass Widow is most definitely filed under the “Rock” section at Jackpot Records here in Portland. For me, that, and the fact that they play traditional rock instruments, and that they cite (punk) rock influences, is good enough. If I chose a broad, rather than a narrow definition for rock, that is because it allows for more diversity and growth. I think of rock as a type of American roots music, and to me, the spirit behind it is basically the same as the spirit behind the blues. The music can go lots of directions, but the spirit of it, the attitude, the feel, the tradition and the departure from tradition – is what makes it rock.

   YMMV.
5. Andrew Sheets says:

   December 30, 2012 at 12:27 pm

   Would love for you to write that article one day.

   I want to step back a second to maintain proper perspective, as I was immersed in figuring out the interaction (or opposition) between “rock `n’roll” (however defined) and the one genre that is defined by female-fronted bands which I think are near and dear to Collapse Board.

   It’s actually exciting to see these bands get coverage. I think you’r point that men (comprising the majority of critics and journalists) are not comfortable here resonates. I can envision all sorts of reasons to account for the discomfort …some profound, as sexism is culture is ingrained, invasive, and insidious…and some prosaic, with journalists or critics having to write about somebody of the opposite gender/gender preference worrying about feelings of attraction or repulsion that wouldn’t come into play when say, Greil Marcus interviews Bono.

   Grass Widow is about as “rock” as any of the late 70s/early 80s post-punk groups, so if Jackpot Records files them along with Mission of Burma and Bush Tetras in the “rock” bin, that’s their prerogative. In fact, I can’t think of a record store that doesn’t have a very inclusive “rock” section…it may be only with online music stores that have gotten me used to narrowcasting. Reasonable people could have very different ideas about whether effort should be directed to redeem the term (making it more inclusive falls in this camp) or shelving it in favor of a different vocabulary, as we continue our dance with architecture.

   I’m not claiming to know a lot about the blues as a genre, but didn’t all the old rock`n’rollers steal their riffs and lines from the great bluesmen? Hendrix started out playing in soul/R&B/blues groups, but grew bored with what he felt was a limiting format. I’d also use “Anglo-American” instead of “American”, as
   many of the classic rock groups were mostly British (Beatles/Stones/Who/Led Zep).

   There’s actually a good degree of diversity in sound of the five groups that you chose to feature (a point that works in your favor to highlight in your feature), so insofar as “rock” is the blanket term for what they’re playing, that fine. And the groups themselves aren’t sitting still. Wax Idols’ new stuff is a lot more gothic/post-punk sounding than their first album, and probably the opposite of anything “rootsy”, unlike EMA, who I’m associating with Ani DeFranco-style vox+acoustic guitar. I, however, was looking for something more when I said “Will we ever see a female-fronted rock group that’s frivolous/up its own arse/play math-rock/not otherwise be boxed into nice little packages or be invested with having to carry the weight of our aspirations?”…it may be more true that question is more revealing about its asker than its subjects, since I was effectively asking for a female-fronted Rush/Bloodhound Gang/Tortoise, spirits help me for my lack of good taste!
6. Everett True says:

   December 30, 2012 at 2:58 pm

   While I appreciate your thoughtful reply here, Andrew…

   “Will we ever see a [female-fronted Rush/Bloodhound Gang/Tortoise]?”

   More to the point, will we ever see a male-fronted Electrelane/Manors/Muscles Of Joy/Tunabunny/Katie Stelmanis/No Mas Bodas? It’s a ridiculous question. Why would we want to?
7. Erika Meyer says:

   December 30, 2012 at 3:36 pm

   Yes, I don’t think I should call rock “American roots music” because it evolved from the blues which was African music meshed with European-type folk music and hymns. The blues is based around a pentatonic scale, the most common type of scale in folk music worldwide http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentatonic_scale

   I have to confess that my personal preference leans AWAY from shredding (fast/nimble lead guitar playing, which I mentally classify under “guitar tricks”) and math rock (I’ve heard many NW all-female bands over the years that I would call “mathy” – but maybe others can provide details). Notable/interesting guitar players include Marnie Stern, Carrie Brownstein, Radio Sloan.

   AFA frivolous/up its own arse – I have a girl friend with a band like this (no recordings, sadly). There are a few of these bands here and there but in my experience bands like this tend to stay really underground unless some industry type takes them seriously enough to help with promotion and booking. Or conversely, these bands eventually become serious about their music.

   I grew up emulating the music to which I was exposed, but my world really didn’t open up until I began to listen to female-made rock music on its own terms (and not just comparing it unfavorably with male counterparts). I think that women rockers have developed somewhat their own musical language, their own aesthetic, their own canon. It is a canon where Bikini Kill beats the Rolling Stones, and P.J. Harvey drowns Bob Dylan. Female-led rock bands tend to experience a different struggle, and claim a different lineage than male rock bands. And so the music is different as well.
8. Hether Fortune says:

   January 1, 2013 at 5:52 am

   Hey guys. Someone clued me in to this discussion & I couldn’t help myself. I admit, my initial reaction to this piece based on its title was something like “Jesus fucking christ…”
   You see, the whole “female fronted” “girl group” “women in rock” thing is something that usually makes my skin crawl. My gender does not define me, nor does it define my work. It irks me automatically when someone decides to use my gender to describe what it is that I am doing with my life. However, over the years I have learned to accept that other people have different ways of interpreting & describing music – what it means to them, the effect it has on them, etc. If it makes the writer of this piece (a woman, right?) proud, happy or excited, as a woman or simply as a human being, to focus specifically on music made by women for a second – that’s cool. Whatever. I appreciate the support regardless of the context.
   That’s all!
   XXX
   Hether
9. Everett True says:

   January 1, 2013 at 6:29 am

   We don’t just run articles promoting female-led bands, Hether. We also run articles promoting male-led bands. Here’s one of our (many) attempts to address the gender imbalance in music.

   Everett True’s 12 favourite all-male albums of 2012
10. Hether Fortune says:

    January 1, 2013 at 8:56 am

    I didn’t suggest that you only run articles promoting female-led bands. I was simply giving my own point of view in regard to THIS article and the greater issue that was brought up within the comments, contributing to the discussion. Happy New Year y’all XXX
11. Erika Meyer says:

    January 1, 2013 at 2:59 pm

    Hether, I’m about twice your age. I’d be really curious if, after 10 or 20 years in the muzic biz, you feel the same way about gender not being important. Maybe you will find that gender is a non issue in your corner of the world because your community has grown THAT enlightened. Male and female musicians both can accept your leadership, and male critics and others in the biz take you and your work seriously. That would be a cool ideal to achieve.

    Me, I believe that over the years gender has affected my opportunities far more than I ever expected it to. I experienced various professional challenges which became extremely pronounced once I became a mother.

    And when it comes to music, I think lots of non-artistic things tend to be used to “define” an artist or her art. For example, image. Gender is part of image. Image has everything to do with marketing – and marketing is a very important part of the music business. Furthermore, bands are not just artistic entities – they are also political and business entities. Gender, and its relationship to power, is potentially an issue in all kinds of political, business, and artistic relationships.

    So yeah, I think it’s worth calling out. It’s worth talking about.
12. Erika Meyer says:

    January 2, 2013 at 5:21 am

    Looking at it another way, what if the topic were “Five Great Bands from the SF Bay Area”? Would readers feel as uncomfortable with a geographical focus as they do with a gender focus? Why or why not?

    I do empathize with frustration at gender being used as a blatant marketing gimmick. It’s an unfortunate side effect of living in a culture where the uncensored female voice is still somehow subversive and exotic while at the same time, the image of the female body (whole, or in parts) is one of the most popular and commonly used marketing tools.
13. Hether Fortune says:

    January 2, 2013 at 5:07 pm

    Hey Erika – those are all really good points. I can see it from many different angles, including the one you’ve presented. It’s a complicated issue & there is no way that everyone is going to feel the same way about it. At this stage in my life though, I do feel differently about gender identity than you do. I really do appreciate the support & I’m glad that what I do is interesting enough to you that you felt compelled to write about it.
14. Andrew Sheets says:

    January 2, 2013 at 7:55 pm

    I’m tempted to just sign off with a “my work here is done, thanks all!”, but another mini-essay is in store.

    I made it a point to check out a song from all the groups Everett mentioned, none of whom I’ve heard before. I really could not imagine male versions of any of these bands, nor would, as he suggests, I want to. No Mas Bodas’ Elefante” I found quite extraordinary, and how could Electrelane have escaped my notice? Yet I feel somehow my argument were finessed around (skillfully, mind you)…since I can’t say I’m alone in thinking many of these groups are at best, semi-obscure, whereas my list featured groups that were at worst, semi-obscure (Tortoise).

    It did illustrate my shock at how much good music there is out there that I’ve never heard of, and my commendation for Collapse Board working to give it some deserved attention…so it was strange to finally see some groups I recognized.

    I guess it’s safe to say that the canon “where Bikini Kill beats the Rolling Stones, and P.J. Harvey drowns Bob Dylan” would not be one that Hether subscribes to, especially interesting as the name “Wax Idols” is derived from the lyric to a Dylan song, and that art should be able to speak to anyone that is listening, not just to archetypical bare-shirted young men in skinny jeans or bird-nested gents clad in Birkenstocks. Yet that doesn’t invalidate such a structure, I think I’m starting to understand the point of nurturing something different than what produced or informs the dominant strains of popular music, even as we should view everything as ultimately interconnected.

    Also, Erika’s point about the effects of motherhood on the opportunities (or lack thereof) afforded to her definitely is something I’d like to see explored…there’s a chasm between parents and non-parents that hopefully we can bridge, since I think there’s a strong perception–some of it self-inflicted, but much of it is just due to a shift in responsibility/lack of time/lack of energy–that parenthood means the death of being able to participate in or partake in artistic endeavors. This rankles me to no end.

    Anyway, I do have to love Everett’s attempt to list out an all-male best of for 2012, the humour behind it may have been overlooked by the intended target…but I can’t approve, as best-of lists in general just make me feel small and queasy when (1) I don’t recognize a name and feel over-burdened when self-obligated to investigate, as if listening to music is somehow a burden and not a joy and (2) the same half a dozen names appear over and over, making me suspicious if some chicanery is afoot, or if it simply comes down to monkey-see monkey-do(o-doo).

    As for “Five Great Bands from the SF Bay Area”…in my opinion, the focus of “San Francisco” is misplaced, as most of these groups would really be from Oakland, due to, over the course of the past several years, gentrification in San Francisco proper (rents going up) forcing creative types to move to the East Bay. However, from the vantage view of Brisbane, separating the two is about equivalent to portraying Brooklyn as being distinct from NYC….why should you care?
15. Rob Wilson says:

    January 3, 2013 at 6:02 am

    I think you are hiding behind the gender issue Erika, perhaps you believe society is a patriarchy in which men are the primary oppressors of women. This is rock music we are talking about, gender and sexuality are not neutral issues- they are part of the metier.
16. Andrew Sheets says:

    January 3, 2013 at 9:42 am

    Rob:

    I think I made a similar argument with saying rock `n’roll had these elements, but I can see this very much depends on what your vision of what rock means to you, which does not have to be reductive, as Erika makes clear.

    And what society are you talking about? “Ours”? The assumptions baked into this statement are very telling, the eye is a poor instrument in which to see itself.
17. Jason Kinniburgh says:

    April 18, 2013 at 2:17 am

    On the day that 52% of musicians are women & some semblance of equality has been achieved articles slanted like this will be less necessary, as long as its many to one I welcome a filter article that gets me straight to some female fronted bands to check out.. levelling the playing field is never out of date. JFK
18. Fame Wizard® | Women Rock says:

    May 18, 2013 at 4:29 am

    [...] Here is a great article on women to watch in music in 2013. [...]
19. Mark says:

    May 23, 2013 at 2:53 am

    If you love hard rockin’ blues you should check out Leah Marie King, another one to watch for 2013!!