FEATURE:
Remastering…
IN THIS PHOTO: Jann Wenner, the founder of Rolling Stone and co-founder of the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame, has said female and Black artists aren’t “intellectual enough” to be interviewed for his new book, The Masters - his outdated and controversial comments caused backlash online and across music media/PHOTO CREDIT: Dana Scruggs for The New York Times
Hachette Job: Changing the Narrative Regarding Race, Gender and Value in Music
_________
THIS may be a generational thing…
IN THIS PHOTO: Beyoncé has inspired artists across multiple genres and is undoubtedly one of the most important and influential artists of any generation/PHOTO CREDIT: Kevin Mazur/Getty Images for TIDAL
but I still think there is a corner of the music industry who feels that superior and the most influential artists are white men. There is not as much credit and spotlight focused on Black artists and Black women especially. Look at festivals headliners and those given the most focus on music magazine covers. There is still this narrative that has existed for decades. It is one that we need to address and change. Maybe, in decades past, most of the more acclaimed music was being created by men. At a time when women are dominating music and so many include Black women are in a league of their own, any comment or perspective against that is jarring and flawed. I mention this, as Jann Wenner, the founder of Rolling Stone and co-founder of the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame, has stirred controversy regarding his new book, The Masters. It contains no women. No Black women. No Black men. The idea and impression, therefore, is that the most important artists - ‘the masters’ - and the best innovators are all white men. I can agree people like Paul McCartney and Bob Dylan instantly spring to mind. What about Joni Mitchell? Beyoncé seems obvious. Madonna. Kate Bush. Kendrick Lamar or JAY-Z. When it comes to women and women of colour, there are options out there. As there is still an issue in the music industry regarding race and gender inequality, it seems like an awful statement bringing out a book which highlights the extraordinary legacy of white male artists. NME explains the (understandable) furore and backlash Wenner has faced:
“Jann Wenner, the founder of Rolling Stone and co-founder of the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame, has said female and black artists aren’t “intellectual enough” to be interviewed for his new book, The Masters.
Within the book, Wenner asks questions of seven “philosophers of rock”, notably all white men – Bono, Bob Dylan, the late Jerry Garcia, Mick Jagger, the late John Lennon, Bruce Springsteen, and Pete Townshend.
In the introduction of the book, Wenner writes that women and artists of colour were not in his zeitgeist. He faced questions about this in an interview with David Marchese of The New York Times, and argued it wasn’t a “deliberate selection”.
“It was kind of intuitive over the years; it just fell together that way. The people had to meet a couple criteria, but it was just kind of my personal interest and love of them. Insofar as the women, just none of them were as articulate enough on this intellectual level,” he said.
PHOTO CREDIT: Bruce Glikas/Getty Images
Marchese countered this by asking, “You’re telling me Joni Mitchell is not articulate enough on an intellectual level?”
Wenner responded: “It’s not that they’re not creative geniuses. It’s not that they’re inarticulate, although, go have a deep conversation with Grace Slick or Janis Joplin. Please, be my guest. You know, Joni was not a philosopher of rock ’n’ roll. She didn’t, in my mind, meet that test. Not by her work, not by other interviews she did. The people I interviewed were the kind of philosophers of rock.
“Of Black artists — you know, Stevie Wonder, genius, right? I suppose when you use a word as broad as “masters,” the fault is using that word. Maybe Marvin Gaye, or Curtis Mayfield? I mean, they just didn’t articulate at that level.”
Marchese then questioned how Wenner could know that if he didn’t give those artists the chance to speak.
“Because I read interviews with them. I listen to their music. I mean, look at what Pete Townshend was writing about, or Jagger, or any of them. They were deep things about a particular generation, a particular spirit and a particular attitude about rock ’n’ roll. Not that the others weren’t, but these were the ones that could really articulate it”.
IN THIS PHOTO: Bob Dylan and Wenner in 1995/PHOTO CREDIT: Anton Corbijn/Contour by Getty Images
Even though this is one man and one book, I think The Masters is systematic of an attitude that prevails. Also, it has a rather unfortunate title and connotation when you consider history and how the word ‘master’ has been employed – even though it is referencing masterful male artists. It has a gender-neutral possibility that means women could have been included. Yesterday, I am published a feature tomorrow that included songs from Black female artists. Incredible tracks from this year. I will expand on this in future and feature truly iconic Black artists. I want to divert slightly and bring part of an interview from The New York Times, where Jann Wenner was promoting The Masters. I have picked it up at the point where the lack of Black women (or women at all) was raised and challenged:
“You developed personal friendships with a lot of the people you interviewed in “The Masters.” I’m curious how you think those friendships helped the interviews, and are there any ways in which they hindered them?
By and large, they helped. Because the interviews I did, they’re not confrontational interviews. They’re not interviews with politicians or business executives. These are interviews with artists. They’re meant to be sympathetic, and they’re meant to elicit from the artist as deep as possible thinking that they’re willing to reveal. I think that the friendships were critical. I mean, the example of Mick Jagger — he just didn’t give interviews to anybody, and he still doesn’t. It’s because we were friends, I got him to do it. I had a particular kind of relationship with Bob Dylan. Jerry Garcia, we were old buddies from years ago. So, it really works. The only place it hurt was with Bruce. That was the interview I did for the book, not for the magazine. And my friendship with Bruce is very deep at this point. It makes it difficult to ask questions that you know the answers to. You’re trimming your sails to the friendship.
PHOTO CREDIT: Dana Scruggs for The New York Times
History will speak. This is also a history-will-speak kind of question. There are seven subjects in the new book; seven white guys. In the introduction, you acknowledge that performers of color and women performers are just not in your zeitgeist. Which to my mind is not plausible for Jann Wenner. Janis Joplin, Joni Mitchell, Stevie Nicks, Stevie Wonder, the list keeps going — not in your zeitgeist? What do you think is the deeper explanation for why you interviewed the subjects you interviewed and not other subjects?
Well, let me just. …
Carole King, Madonna. There are a million examples.
When I was referring to the zeitgeist, I was referring to Black performers, not to the female performers, OK? Just to get that accurate. The selection was not a deliberate selection. It was kind of intuitive over the years; it just fell together that way. The people had to meet a couple criteria, but it was just kind of my personal interest and love of them. Insofar as the women, just none of them were as articulate enough on this intellectual level.
Oh, stop it. You’re telling me Joni Mitchell is not articulate enough on an intellectual level?
Hold on a second.
PHOTO CREDIT: Hachette (Wenner said the subjects of his new book were the “philosophers of rock”)
I’ll let you rephrase that.
All right, thank you. It’s not that they’re not creative geniuses. It’s not that they’re inarticulate, although, go have a deep conversation with Grace Slick or Janis Joplin. Please, be my guest. You know, Joni was not a philosopher of rock ’n’ roll. She didn’t, in my mind, meet that test. Not by her work, not by other interviews she did. The people I interviewed were the kind of philosophers of rock.
Of Black artists — you know, Stevie Wonder, genius, right? I suppose when you use a word as broad as “masters,” the fault is using that word. Maybe Marvin Gaye, or Curtis Mayfield? I mean, they just didn’t articulate at that level.
How do you know if you didn’t give them a chance?
Because I read interviews with them. I listen to their music. I mean, look at what Pete Townshend was writing about, or Jagger, or any of them. They were deep things about a particular generation, a particular spirit and a particular attitude about rock ’n’ roll. Not that the others weren’t, but these were the ones that could really articulate it.
Don’t you think it’s actually more to do with your own interests as a fan and a listener than anything particular to the artists? I think the problem is when you start saying things like “they” or “these artists can’t.” Really, it’s a reflection of what you’re interested in more than any ability or inability on the part of these artists, isn’t it?
That was my No. 1 thing. The selection was intuitive. It was what I was interested in. You know, just for public relations sake, maybe I should have gone and found one Black and one woman artist to include here that didn’t measure up to that same historical standard, just to avert this kind of criticism. Which, I get it. I had a chance to do that. Maybe I’m old-fashioned and I don’t give a [expletive] or whatever. I wish in retrospect I could have interviewed Marvin Gaye. Maybe he’d have been the guy. Maybe Otis Redding, had he lived, would have been the guy”.
IN THIS PHOTO: Labelle
There is more to Venner’s book and outdated attitudes than it being a bit controversial. You have to wonder what could have been had Black women decades ago had been given more opportunities ands exposure. What about the pioneering and influential Black men in music that he omitted? From Smokey Robinson springs to mind. Stevie Wonder is one of the most influential artists who has ever lived! Magazines like Rolling Stone were dominated by men in their ranks and on their covers. Think what would happen now is the music press still considered white men more relevant and only worthy of highlighting. To be fair, the industry still is racist and sexist, yet exposing troubling and problematic views that white men are superior regarding artistic endeavour has historical connotations outside of music. We get into seriously problematic political and social territory. The truth is that the music industry is so vibrant and inspiring right now largely because of women and women of colour. We do live at a time when there is stubborn progress regarding recognising that and rewarding it with equality and overdue acknowledgement. The Guardian published a feature that said Jan Wenner’s views are perhaps not quite as unusual as they seem – as in the music industry is still sexist and racist. In no way defending him, Craig Seymour writes that Wenner is exposing music’s bias when it comes to race, gender and artistic value:
“In 2020, I was a guest on the Who Cares About the Rock Hall? podcast, discussing why one of my favourite bands, Labelle, should be inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. They were certainly deserving: they sang socially conscious songs from a Black woman’s perspective, espoused a philosophy that reflected the intersectional politics of Black feminists such as the Combahee River Collective, and sported a space-age look now celebrated as an expression of Black futurism.
The problem was that I didn’t know how to articulate Labelle’s significance in terms that made sense for the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. Labelle only had one big hit, Lady Marmalade, an ode to a Creole sex worker; the group’s most direct influence has been multiple covers of Lady Marmalade that have almost no connection with the group’s radical politics and style. I just didn’t see how I would be able to translate the group’s importance to the type of people who vote for Rock and Roll Hall of Fame inductees, meaning the mostly white men who historically have voted to induct artists who are white men, partly because of the way they’ve influenced other white men.
IN THIS PHOTO: Wenner in 1970/PHOTO CREDIT: Bettmann Archive
I thought about this podcast moment again when I read the comments of Rolling Stone magazine founder and Rock and Roll Hall of Fame co-founder Jann Wenner, in the New York Times. In his forthcoming book The Masters, Wenner compiles his interviews with seven rock musicians, all white men, “philosophers of rock,” as Wenner calls them. But Black musicians, he said, “just didn’t articulate at that level” and Joni Mitchell also “didn’t, in my mind, meet that test”. The likes of Mick Jagger and Pete Townshend expressed, he said, “deep things about a particular generation, a particular spirit and a particular attitude about rock’n’roll. Not that the others weren’t, but these were the ones that could really articulate it.”
He later apologised, saying “I totally understand the inflammatory nature of badly chosen words”, ones that “don’t reflect my appreciation and admiration for myriad totemic, world-changing artists”. But his earlier comments linger, confirming as they do the unspoken biases I have experienced in the world of music criticism since entering the field as a Black gay man in the 90s.
It does seem archaic publishing anything – whether a book, article or documentary – that discusses white men as being the most important artists. The true innovators. Excluding women comes at a moment where even thew Rock & Roll Hall of Fame – who have been called out for the lack of women nominated and inducted – still is dominated by male artists. You only need look at festivals headliners and the gender breakdown across radio playlists to see that male artist Are a go-to. Women being excluded and cast to the side. Things are starting to improve in some areas, though there needs to be a concerted and dedicated promise from the industry to improve visibility and bring about parity. It is always egregious and
“What’s needed at this moment isn’t just Wenner’s excoriation and ousting from the board of the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, though that has happened. We need a complete rethinking of the criteria by which artists are deemed important, influential, and relevant, especially since many of the critics and editors who were trained by or influenced by Wenner are still working in journalism and book publishing.
IN THIS PHOTO: Wenner inaugurating the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame/PHOTO CREDIT: Rex Features
In 2004, critic Kelefa Sanneh attempted to address this issue in The Rap Against Rockism. He wrote: “Rockism means idolising the authentic old legend (or underground hero) while mocking the latest pop star; lionising punk while barely tolerating disco; loving the live show and hating the music video; extolling the growling performer while hating the lip-syncer.” Sanneh’s critique helped birth what some call “poptimism”, which, as critic Chris Richards describes it, “contends that all pop music deserves a thoughtful listen and a fair shake, that guilty pleasures are really just pleasures, that the music of an Ariana Grande can and should be taken as seriously as that of a U2.”
There is now a cadre of younger music writers devoted to documenting the true breadth of musical expression. The problem is that poptimism’s impulse to flatten the landscape fails to acknowledge how rocky the ground still is: how sexism and racism underpins the way many women and Black artists remain more embraced in the world of pop than rock. The only way to move the conversation forward – and reclaim any potential music criticism has to incite social change – is by fighting sexism and anti-Blackness with the same openness that Wenner revealed it. Otherwise, this whole controversy will just prove to be yet another moment of performative outrage that leaves the status quo unchecked”.
Maybe we still have too much of the ‘old guard’ holding way too much influence and their views and stubbornness hindering real progress. I really don’t think it is only that. I do agree with The Guardian that the industry has always been (and is now) sexist and racist. We all have a list of Black artists and Black women especially who are important, influential and vital. Great Black male artists doing phenomenal things and releasing music that is going to inspire people for decades to come. Maybe trying to articulate their merit and importance in terms of how bodies like the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame would understand it. There does need to be a reframing and redefining of importance and musical significance – taking it further away from white guys with guitars. One quote from Craig Seymour seems particularly timely: “The problem is that poptimism’s impulse to flatten the landscape fails to acknowledge how rocky the ground still is: how sexism and racism underpins the way many women and Black artists remain more embraced in the world of pop than rock”.
IN THIS PHOTO: The iconic genius Stevie Wonder/PHOTO CREDIT: Mike Coppola/Getty Images
When artists like Nova Twins, Bob Vylan and Corinne Bailey Rae are delivering some of the spikiest, most important and moving Rock/Rock-based music of the past couple of years, there are not many pages and articles dedicated to the modern Black queens of Rock. Black men who are modern legends and icons. It is vital we remember the legends. Though I feel certain genres are still perceived as white and being reserved for white men – Rock, Folk, Country, and even Rap are still having to answer a lot of uncomfortable questions without providing clear rationale. It is clear that things needs to change…though that eternal question remains: How do we do that?! New media is definitely shifting the narrative and is as open, embracing and diverse as it has ever been. It seems insane to think any right-minded journalist or author, when looking at music’s history and the pioneers, would only see white men. Look at modern music, and you can see the influence and impact that Black female and male artists of the past have had. How Black artists of today are inspiring so many others! Controversial and wrong-headed people like Jann Wenner, sadly, are not in a minority when they (intentionally or not) suggest that there are few women and Black men and women of note in music’s past. That sexism and racism is evident. Their mindsets and attitudes definitely are in…
IMAGE CREDIT: Rolling Stone
NEED of retooling and remastering.